Results-Based Monitoring of Competency-Based Curriculum Integration in Public Primary Schools In Kenya: Examining the Kenya Primary Education Equity in Learning (KPEEL) Programme

The implementation of the Competency Based Curriculum (CBC) in Kenya is one of the biggest education reforms in Sub-Saharan Africa that demands strong monitoring systems to guarantee their successful implementation and fairness in learning outcomes. This study looks in detail at the results-based monitoring architecture used for CBC integration in public primary schools, specifically the Kenya Primary Education Equity in Learning (KPEEL) Programme (2022-2026). The study used a qualitative document review and policy analysis approach, informed by Results Based Management Theory, the Context–Input–Process–Product (CIPP) Evaluation Model developed by Stufflebeam and Socio-Technical Systems Theory. Information was compiled from government reports, programme appraisal documents, monitoring frameworks, institutional evaluations and peer-reviewed literature from 2022-2025. It looked at the effectiveness of the monitoring mechanisms such as the National Education Management Information System (NEMIS), the Teacher Performance Appraisal and Development (TPAD) system, the Competency Based Assessment (CBA) portal and the Independent Verification Agency (IVA) framework. The results show that Kenya has a wide range of monitoring platforms in place but there is a lack of interoperability; monitoring data is not being used effectively for instructional improvement; capacity to use monitoring data at school level is too low; and there are still equity gaps in marginalised areas. There is some evidence that monitoring tools continue to focus on compliance and reporting upwards and not on adaptive decision making and continuous improvement. The study highlights the presence of an ongoing feedback utilization gap as a major challenge and suggests a systems strengthening strategy, which focuses on closed loop feedback mechanisms, improved platform integration, ongoing professional support and resource availability based on needs. The results add to the current debate on educational accountability, results-based management, and implementation of curriculum reform in developing countries.

Competency Based Curriculum, Results Based Monitoring, Educational Accountability, KPEEL Programme, Monitoring and Evaluation, Kenya

1. Akbarighatar, P., Müller, B., & Meijer, S. (2023). A sociotechnical perspective for responsible AI maturity. Journal of Responsible Technology. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266709682300040X [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Akinyi, M., Odundo, P., & Gunga, S. (2023). Gender-responsive monitoring and evaluation process and implementation of competency-based education programs in public primary schools in Kisumu County, Kenya. African Journal of Education and Practice, 9(2), 45–62. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Eshetie, G. G., & Ambaye, K. (2024). Geospatial technologies in support of responsible land governance in developing countries. Land Use Policy. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1195103624000144 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Gichuru, J., & Otieno, R. (2023). Data quality and utilization in Kenya's National Education Management Information System: A case of Nairobi City County. East African Journal of Education Studies, 6(3), 112–128. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Global Partnership for Education. (2025). Results-based financing in basic education: Lessons from the Kenya Primary Education Equity in Learning Program. GPE Working Paper. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Kenya Education Management Institute. (2024). Empowering Junior School Leaders: KEMI's role in advancing education in Kenya. Nairobi: KEMI. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development. (2022). Monitoring for improvement: A framework for evaluating the competency-based curriculum. Nairobi: KICD. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Kenya National Examinations Council. (2024). NASMLA Grade 3 midline abridged report. Nairobi: Kenya National Examinations Council. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Kioko, M., & Nyaga, J. (2022). School monitoring, evaluation and adjustment (SMEA) and teacher motivation in public primary schools in Kitui County. Journal of Education and Practice, 13(18), 1–9. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Kudina, O., & van de Poel, I. (2024). A sociotechnical system perspective on AI. Minds & Machines, 34, Article 21. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11023-024-09680-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Kusek, J. Z., & Rist, R. C. (2004). Ten steps to a results-based monitoring and evaluation system: A handbook for development practitioners. Washington, DC: World Bank. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Ministry of Education. (2025). Elimu Scholarship monitoring report. Nairobi: Government of Kenya. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Mulwa, D., Mwania, J., & Kimiti, R. (2023). Monitoring and evaluation practices in CBC implementation: A survey of primary schools in Machakos and Makueni Counties. International Journal of Education and Research, 11(4), 67–82. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Murphy, K., Lyytinen, K., & Somers, T. (2023). A socio-technical model for project-based executive IT governance. SCIREA Journal of Computer, 8(1), 25–48. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Muthoni, G., Karanja, D., & Omondi, B. (2025). Teacher Performance Appraisal and Development (TPAD) in Kenya: Intentions and realities. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 53(2), 305–321. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Ochieng, P., & Wanjala, G. (2023). Rethinking curriculum monitoring: Bridging the gap between policy and classroom practice in Kenya's CBC. African Educational Research Journal, 11(1), 98–113. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Opondo, J., & Were, S. (2024). Independent verification of results in education: Insights from the KPEEL programme. KIPPRA Discussion Paper No. 308. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). Strengthening the monitoring of education reforms. Paris: OECD Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Rugeiyamu, G., & Mesdo, R. (2025). Success, challenges, and prospects of decentralization in Africa: A systematic review. Journal of African Governance Studies, 8(2), 44–67. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Smolka, M., et al. (2023). Responsible innovation ecosystem governance: Co-designing socio-technical integration in energy systems. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23299460.2023.2207937 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Stufflebeam, D. L., & Zhang, G. (2017). The CIPP evaluation model: How to evaluate for improvement and accountability. New York: Guilford Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. UNESCO. (2023). Global Education Monitoring Report 2023: Technology in education – A tool on whose terms? Paris: UNESCO. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Wafula, E., & Simiyu, C. (2024). Pathways from monitoring to learning: A structural equation modelling study of CBC implementation in Western Kenya. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2345678. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Wekesa, J., & Kafwa, N. (2024). Instructional supervision and the quality of competency-based curriculum delivery in Bungoma County. East African Journal of Education and Social Sciences, 5(1), 44–58. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. World Bank. (2022). Program appraisal document: Kenya Primary Education Equity in Learning Program (Report No. PAD4486). Washington, DC: World Bank Group. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. World Bank. (2024). Kenya economic update: Turning the tide on learning poverty. Nairobi: World Bank Group. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. World Bank. (2025). Implementation status and results report: Primary Education Equity in Learning Program (P176867) (Seq No: 9, Archived 15-Jun-2025). Washington, DC: World Bank Group. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. World Bank. (2026, forthcoming). Implementation completion and results report: Kenya Primary Education Equity in Learning Program (P176867). Washington, DC: World Bank Group [Google Scholar] [Crossref]