Launch of the 2015/16 Kenya Integrated Household Budget Survey (KIHBS) Reports

Rationale for Implementation of 2015/16 KIHBS

Provide updated parameters for sharing of national resources as provided in the Constitution of Kenya, 2010
Provide a wide range of national and county-specific indicators necessary for assessment of the living standards of the population.
Monitoring the impact of the Implementation of the devolved system of Government
Monitor and evaluate Government programmes. eg Medium Term Plan (MTP II) and to provide benchmark indicators for Medium Term Plan III
Provide indicators for monitoring Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Agenda 2063

The objectives of the 2015/16 KIHBS were:

Computation of updated poverty and inequality indicators at national and county levels
Computation of updated labour force indicators
Computation of updated consumption baskets to produce new Consumer Price Index (CPI) series
Provide requisite data for the System of National Accounts (SNA)

History of Household Budget Surveys (HBS): –

2015/16 Kenya Integrated Household Budget Survey KIHBS

Survey conducted over a 12-month period to capture seasonality- from September 2015 to August 2016.
Recommended duration for implementation of Household Budget Surveys is once every five years

Methodology

2015/16 KIHBS targeted a sample of 24,000 households drawn from 2400 clusters
Sampling- The sampling for the survey was done in two stages.
In the first stage, a total of 2,400 clusters (988 in urban and 1,412 in rural areas) were sampled from NASSEP V sampling frame
The second stage involved selection of 10 households (from each cluster) out of which five households were randomly selected for the administration of diaries

Survey Instruments

Three main questionnaires and two dairies were administered to the household
One market questionnaire and a community questionnaire
Survey instruments were administered using the Paper Assisted Personal Interview (PAPI)

Response Rates

Data was obtained from 21,773 Households representing a response rate of 91.3 Per cent
Response rate for rural households was 93.6% while that for Urban areas was 88.0%.
The non-response albeit low was occasioned by insecurity and unavailability of households due to nomadism in some parts of the country