Reimagining Public Service Delivery in Kenya: Evaluating the Impact of E-Governance and Huduma Services Amidst the 2025 Public Sector Reforms

Reimagining Public Service Delivery in Kenya: Evaluating the Impact of E-Governance and Huduma Services Amidst the 2025 Public Sector Reforms | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Case Report Reimagining Public Service Delivery in Kenya: Evaluating the Impact of E-Governance and Huduma Services Amidst the 2025 Public Sector Reforms Mark Kibor Kemboi, Peteti Premanandam This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6953581/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 10 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This paper examines citizen perceptions of Kenya’s public service delivery in the context of recent governance reforms, focusing on digital platforms such as the Huduma Kenya programme and the national e-Citizen portal. Using a structured questionnaire, we surveyed Kenyan residents across urban and rural areas to evaluate awareness and usage of Huduma and e-Citizen services, satisfaction with these platforms, and attitudes toward corruption, inclusion, and ongoing reforms. Our results (n = 39) show that most respondents are young adults, with a higher proportion of male (72%) than female (28%) participants. Nearly all respondents had used Huduma or e-Citizen services in the past year (100% awareness), primarily for passport application and tax registration services. Overall, the experience was rated mostly as “good” or “average” (over 80%), though long waiting times, system downtime, and poor internet connectivity were cited as major challenges. Most perceived that e-Government platforms have significantly reduced corruption (15% “strongly agree” and 49% “agree”) and expressed mixed views on digital inclusivity, although 51% cited “yes”. Notably, 67% felt sufficiently informed about the recent 2024 cabinet reshuffle and 2025 public service reforms, and 69% believed Huduma/e-Gov could support better governance under these reforms. When asked about priorities for improving digital services, respondents emphasized enhancing digital literacy and public awareness (72% of respondents) and expanding infrastructure and rural access (56%). These findings underscore that while Kenya’s digital service initiatives have raised public awareness and convenience, significant barriers remain in access and effectiveness, especially in marginalized communities. We discuss how the Huduma Kenya digitalization plan and broader e-government commitments aim to address these gaps (e.g., 80% of services automated, universal “one-stop” agents), and we situate our empirical results within theories of e-service adoption and the digital divide. The paper concludes with recommendations for policymakers on expanding connectivity, training, and community outreach to ensure that public sector reforms translate into inclusive improvements in service delivery. E-governance Huduma Centers eCitizen platform public service delivery social equity Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Introduction Governments worldwide are increasingly turning to digital solutions to enhance public service delivery, improve transparency, and engage citizens more effectively. In Kenya, the Huduma Kenya initiative, launched in 2013–2014, epitomizes this trend by providing “one-stop-shop” access to multiple government services from a single location. Complementing Huduma’s physical centers, the e-Citizen portal serves as a unified digital platform offering thousands of government services online. Together, these platforms are intended to reduce inefficiencies, cut costs, and curb corruption by minimizing human queues and paperwork. For example, the government’s recent Huduma Kenya digitalization plan aims to automate 80% of critical services and introduce innovations like self-service kiosks and “Huduma on Wheels” (mobile units). Nevertheless, Kenya’s ambitious digital agenda faces challenges. Significant segments of the population remain unconnected or lack digital skills. Nearly 71% of Kenyans live in rural areas with limited broadband access, and high data costs have placed Kenya among the most expensive in East Africa. The government itself acknowledges that rapid digitization risks leaving disadvantaged groups “behind” unless measures ensure inclusivity. In this context, understanding citizen perceptions of e-government initiatives is critical. Our study explores Kenyan public attitudes toward Huduma and e-Citizen services during the rollout of the 2025 public sector reforms. Specifically, we investigate: ( 1 ) levels of awareness and usage of e-Gov platforms; ( 2 ) user satisfaction and perceived barriers; ( 3 ) beliefs about corruption reduction and inclusivity; and ( 4 ) opinions on how these platforms can support the new reform agenda. By combining these citizen viewpoints with existing studies and theoretical insights, we aim to inform policymakers on how best to refine Kenya’s digital service strategy. Literature Review E-Government and Service Delivery. Broadly, e-government is posited to enhance public service efficiency, effectiveness, and transparency by leveraging ICT tools. Scholars note that when citizens can access services online or at integrated centers, administrative costs and bureaucratic hurdles tend to fall. For example, Gatobu and Muthini (2021) found in Embu County that the use of the e-Citizen portal significantly improved citizen satisfaction with service delivery, reducing wait times and perceived corruption. Similarly, a case study of a Huduma Centre in Mombasa revealed that a majority of respondents saw e-government adoption as bolstering the efficiency and reliability of services. The Huduma Kenya program itself was designed to “bring many government services into one location,” literally implementing the “one-stop-shop” model to overcome past inefficiencies. These initiatives reflect Kenya’s alignment with broader global trends of citizen-centric public administration (Huduma centers are often cited as part of the Vision 2030 agenda). However, independent reviews and academic analyses temper these optimistic narratives. Some research suggests that e-government efforts in Kenya have been hampered by infrastructure gaps and limited user readiness. For instance, Gatobu and Muthini note persistent project failures and “ineffective and inadequate use of e-government services” despite multi-million-dollar investments. Other studies highlight that rural populations, women, the elderly, and the poor are less likely to benefit from digital platforms, due to a lack of internet, devices, or relevant skills. A recent blog by Strathmore University’s CIPIT observes that although platforms like e-Citizen and Huduma Kenya have proliferated, “not all Kenyan citizens have reliable internet access or own internet-enabled devices,” meaning that “significant disparities persist in access, connectivity, and digital literacy. In sum, the literature suggests that while Kenyan e-government programs have potential , their impact depends heavily on addressing the digital divide and service quality. Digital Divide and Inclusion. Digital inclusion is a central theme in Kenya’s tech-policy discourse. The Open Government Partnership’s Action Plan explicitly frames “safe, responsible and human rights-centered digital transformation” as a national commitment, aiming to bridge exclusion in digital services. These documents report that, by 2023, only about one-third of Kenyans had internet access, and the government had digitized roughly 5,000 services (targeting 12,000 by 2023). Meanwhile, studies by organizations like CIGI find that rural–urban disparities remain stark: about 70.7% of Kenyans live in rural areas, where broadband adoption is far lower than in cities. This gap “limits access to financial, education, health-care, and administrative services” for rural Kenyans. Income and poverty also interplay strongly: Strathmore CIPIT notes that remote counties with high poverty (e.g., Turkana, Samburu) have internet usage below 40%, while wealthy urban counties (Nairobi, Kiambu) far exceed the national average. Such evidence underlines warnings that unchecked digital initiatives could “perpetuate existing inequalities” if infrastructure and outreach do not target marginalized communities. Huduma Kenya in Reform. The government recognizes these challenges and has articulated ambitious strategies. Kenya’s Huduma Digitalization Plan (2025) envisions new service platforms (kiosks, virtual centers, Huduma Mashinani mobile units) and a “universal agent” model where a single staffer can handle multiple services. The plan also emphasizes robust cybersecurity, data protection, and user support standards. Furthermore, the 2025 Public Service reforms, following a 2024 Cabinet reshuffle, are intended to reorganize ministries and accelerate efficiency (e.g., establishing Huduma centers in all counties). However, public awareness of these reform efforts appears low: as we will show, most citizens surveyed were not familiar with the new initiatives. The literature indicates that stakeholders see Huduma and e-Citizen as critical linchpins for achieving the reforms’ goals of transparency and citizen participation. Therefore, understanding current citizen experiences and perceptions is crucial for evaluating whether Kenya is on track to reap the promised benefits of e-governance under its new policy agenda. Theoretical Framework This study is informed by theories of technology adoption and service satisfaction. In particular, the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) provides a lens for analyzing how expectations, ease-of-use, social factors, and support conditions influence the uptake of e-government services. UTAUT and related models (such as TAM and Expectation-Confirmation Theory) have been widely applied in e-government research. For instance, Oliveira et al. (2021) and others show that user satisfaction with digital services is mediated by service quality, perceived value, and actual system performance. Our questionnaire draws partly on this tradition by asking respondents about their prior experience and perceived hurdles (which relate to facilitating conditions and effort expectancy). Additionally, concepts from digital divide theory frame our analysis of inclusivity. We consider variables such as rural vs. urban residence and literacy level (Table 1) in light of findings that these correlate with e-service usage. Finally, we adopt a citizen-centric view of public services: client satisfaction theory suggests that timely, reliable, and transparent services improve perceptions of government legitimacy. In practice, we interpret our results through these dual lenses: how citizens perceive ease and usefulness of e-services (adoption theory) and how any barriers they face reflect broader structural inequalities (digital divide theory). Methodology We conducted a cross-sectional survey targeting Kenyan residents aged 18 and above. Data collection was carried out via a structured online questionnaire between June 2025 and July 2025. The questionnaire (Appendix) covered demographics (age, gender, location, education, employment), awareness and usage of Huduma/e-Citizen services, satisfaction ratings, experienced challenges, perceptions of corruption and inclusivity, and views on recent reforms. Participants were recruited through convenience sampling using social media platforms by sharing the questionnaire links for easy responses; participation was voluntary and anonymous. In total, 39 valid responses were obtained. The sample characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Data analysis was primarily descriptive. We computed frequencies and percentages for each survey item and constructed charts to visualize key distributions. Likert-scale items on experience and corruption were treated as categorical for reporting purposes (no inferential tests were conducted due to the limited sample size). Open-ended suggestions and comments (e.g. “What would you suggest to improve digital services?”) were reviewed qualitatively to identify common themes. The reliability of our survey instrument was ensured by pilot testing it with a small group (N = 10) before full deployment. Questions were adapted from existing e-government satisfaction scales and tailored to the Kenyan Huduma context. This research design is consistent with other studies of Huduma services (e.g. Gatobu & Muthini 2021; Mwendwa & Kandiri 2025) that have used Huduma center surveys and case studies. However, the convenience sampling and online mode likely skewed the sample toward younger and more literate respondents. We acknowledge this limitation in the Discussion section. All procedures complied with ethical standards: informed consent was obtained at the survey start, and no personal identifiers were collected. Results Respondent Profile Age : Respondents were predominantly young. Over half (51%) were aged 25–34, 28% were 28–24, 18% were 35–44, and 3% were 45–54; no respondents were aged 55 and above. No respondents were older than 34. Gender : The majority (72%) were male, with 28% female; no participants identified as other or preferred not to say. Location : 64% of respondents lived in urban areas, while 36% were rural; none reported residing in informal settlements. Education and Employment : Most had a university degree (54%); 31% had postgraduate education, 10% had tertiary (college or university) education, and 5% had secondary education. No respondents reported formal education, likely reflecting our convenience sample. In terms of employment, 51% were students, 26% worked in the public sector, 13% in the private sector, and 10% were unemployed. No respondents were unemployed. Table 1 and the pie charts in Fig. 1 summarize these demographics. Figure 1 (below) illustrates the distribution of respondents by age group, gender, Location, education, and employment status. Also below the tables is a pie chart representation of the same information in the table. Notably, the sample skews female and heavily young adult, which may reflect the networks through which the survey circulated. These demographic trends help contextualize subsequent findings: for example, younger and better-educated citizens may have different levels of digital literacy and trust in e-services than older, less educated cohorts (a point we revisit in the Discussion). Figure 1 . Demographic Profile of Respondents (N = 39) Variable Category Percentage (%) Age 25–34 51 18–24 28 35–44 18 45–54 3 55 and above 0 Gender Male 72 Female 28 Other / Prefer not to say 0 Location Urban 64 Rural 36 Informal settlements 0 Education Secondary education 5 Tertiary (college/university) 10 University degree 54 Postgraduate 31 No formal education 0 Employment Student 51 Public sector 26 Private sector 13 Awareness and Usage of Huduma/E-Citizen Services All 39 respondents reported awareness of Huduma Centres or the e-Citizen portal, reflecting strong penetration of the program (in line with government claims of widespread publicity). Figure 2 shows which services respondents have accessed through Huduma or e-Citizen in the past 12 months (multiple selections allowed). The most commonly used services were Passport applications and KRA/PIN tax services (selected by 46% and 49% of respondents, respectively), followed by National ID issuance (28%), Driving License services, and Birth/Death certificates (26% each). Business registration (23%). while NHIF/NSSF contributions (21%). Only 10% reported accessing “other” services outside the main categories. These patterns align with the idea that highly demanded government documents (IDs, passports, tax records) have been digitized. Practically all respondents (97%) had used at least one Huduma/e-Citizen service in the past year. Most first experiences occurred at Huduma centres (physical offices) rather than online. For example, passports and national ID cards still require in-person submission despite online pre-registration in some cases. Overall Experience and Challenges Respondents rated their overall experience with Huduma or e-Citizen services on a five-point scale. The results (Fig. 3 , a) were generally positive: 87% rated the service “Excellent” (32%) or “Good” (55%), and 13% rated it “Average.” Notably, none rated their experience as “Poor” or “Very Poor.” This indicates a majority satisfaction. Despite the fairly good ratings, many respondents reported challenges. As shown in Fig. 3 (a), the most frequently cited problem was long waiting times (74% of respondents), followed by system downtime or website errors (31%). Approximately 26% noted poor internet connectivity as a barrier, 10% reported “unfriendly staff”, 8% reported lack of digital literacy, and 3% Language barrier. 8% selected none. In summary, three-quarters of users experienced at least one significant issue. These findings suggest that while the e-Government platforms work satisfactorily for most citizens when they do work, operational hurdles remain a major concern. Long queues at physical Huduma centres (despite one-stop design) and periodic online outages undermine efficiency. Such bottlenecks have been noted in other studies: for example, the Mombasa Huduma case reported that the system freezes, and data glitches erode user satisfaction. Our survey data corroborate that technology access (connectivity and uptime) and process flow (staff efficiency) are critical determinants of the citizen experience. Perceptions of Corruption and Inclusion We asked whether respondents believe Huduma/e-Governance platforms have reduced corruption in service delivery. 15% “strongly agree” and 49% “agree” that corruption is reduced, while 23% remained neutral, 13% disagreed, and 3% strongly disagreed. In practical terms, 16% of respondents expressed skepticism (disagree/strongly disagree) about corruption reduction. This mixed sentiment aligns with broader analyses suggesting that digital portals can reduce petty bribery by limiting face-to-face interactions, but that broader governance reforms are still needed for wholesale impact. We also probed whether digital platforms are inclusive for all Kenyans, including the elderly, disabled, and rural poor. Responses were similarly divided: 51% of respondents answered “Yes,” whereas 13% answered “Not sure” and 36% answered “No.” Thus, more than half doubted that current e-services fully reach marginalized groups. These points concern from digital divide research. For instance, Okello (2024) notes that rural infrastructure gaps and limited device ownership mean many citizens cannot “meaningfully engage” with e-government. Likewise, Strathmore CIPIT highlights that counties with low income and sparse networks remain excluded. Our findings reinforce that perception gap: even among our relatively young and educated sample, majorities worry that older or disabled Kenyans might be left out by a predominantly online service model. Awareness of Reforms and Reform Support Finally, we asked about awareness of the 2024 Cabinet reshuffle and 2025 public sector reforms, and whether respondents felt Huduma/e-Governance could support better governance under these reforms. 67% of respondents said they were “Yes” aware of the reforms; 21% said “No,” and 13% said “Somewhat” aware. This indicates that about two-thirds of citizens had at best information about these changes. In other words, the reform drive appears to have reached mass public consciousness by mid-2025. When asked if Huduma and e-Citizen services can support better governance under the new reforms, 69% said “Yes,” while 5% said “No,” and 26% were uncertain. Thus, about three-quarters of respondents applauded that existing e-services alone would translate the reforms into improved outcomes. Suggested Improvements and Priorities In open-ended responses, many participants suggested concrete improvements. Common themes included expanding internet access, improving network reliability, and enhancing digital literacy training. Several respondents advocated for increasing rural connectivity (“improve network connectivity in rural areas”), deploying agents or kiosks to help those without devices, and making fees transparent. Some emphasized non-technical fixes as well (e.g., “staff accountability,” “reduce waiting periods,” “avoid system jams”), echoing the quantitative results. When asked specifically what the government’s top priorities should be for improving digital service delivery, respondents selected multiple areas. Figure 4 (right) aggregates these selections. The clear top priority was “ Digital literacy and public awareness” (chosen by 72% of respondents). This suggests citizens believe training and education are critical for inclusive e-Government. Next was infrastructure and internet access (56%), followed closely by rural outreach and inclusion initiatives (51%). Over 46% also stressed staff training and accountability, and 36% selected system upgrades and integration (e.g. backend improvements). These priorities reinforce that users see both human factors (education, accountability) and technical factors (connectivity, systems) as essential levers. Discussion Our findings reveal a nuanced picture of e-Governance in Kenya. On one hand, awareness of Huduma and e-Citizen is pervasive among participants, and most have used such services. This suggests that the government’s public information campaigns and rollout have achieved broad visibility. The high usage of key services (IDs, passports, tax registration) confirms that the platforms are fulfilling citizen demand for vital documents. Importantly, a strong majority rated their experience as at least “Good,” indicating general functionality. These positive outcomes echo previous studies of Huduma centres, which similarly found that co-locating services reduced travel burdens and waiting for users. On the other hand, our data underscore significant challenges. Most salient are infrastructure and usability barriers. Even within our likely tech-savvy sample, 74% reported waiting-time delays and 31% reported outages. These figures align with established research: the CIPIT blog noted Kenya’s high broadband costs and patchy rural coverage, and our respondents’ concerns about connectivity mirror that. If well-informed, rural residents currently experience frustration rather than efficiency gains from e-Government. Similarly, 72% emphasizing digital literacy shows awareness that connectivity alone is insufficient – citizens also need training and user support, especially in underserved areas. The Kenyan digitalization plan’s focus on capacity building and accessibility, like service kiosks seems well-targeted to these gaps The data presented offers valuable insight into public perception regarding the role of Huduma and e-Governance platforms in curbing corruption within service delivery. A majority of respondents (64%, combining those who strongly agree and agree ) believe that these digital platforms have contributed to reducing corruption. This reflects a positive endorsement of the platforms' ability to minimize direct interactions between citizens and public officers — interactions that often create opportunities for petty bribery. However, a significant minority (16%) expressed skepticism, either disagreeing or strongly disagreeing that corruption has declined. Additionally, 23% remained neutral, suggesting uncertainty or perceived limited change. This distribution of views illustrates that while digital systems like Huduma and e-Citizen are seen by many as tools for enhancing transparency and accountability, they are not perceived as a complete solution to corruption challenges. The mixed sentiment aligns with wider research on e-governance. It suggests that while technology can effectively reduce low-level, transactional corruption by automating services and reducing discretionary power at service points, the persistence of corruption at systemic levels requires deeper institutional reforms, stronger enforcement mechanisms, and sustained political will. In the context of this case, the findings highlight that digital innovations are a step forward but must be complemented by broader governance strategies to achieve meaningful and lasting reductions in corruption. Finally, the glaring lack of awareness about the 2024-25 reforms themselves points to a disconnect between government agendas and citizen engagement. Despite the symposiums and policy discussions (such as APSD 2025) emphasizing innovation, everyday citizens do not know what is happening. This may undermine reform momentum: an engaged public is needed to hold institutions accountable and provide feedback. Our respondents’ call for public awareness as the top priority highlights this gap. It suggests that without sustained outreach, the transformative potential of reforms (including digital components) may not be realized. In light of theory, these results are intuitive. UTAUT would predict that facilitating conditions (connectivity, training) and performance expectancy (user satisfaction) heavily drive usage. Here, we see that where conditions falter (poor internet, untrained staff), intent to use and trust wane (evident in low reform buy-in). From a public administration perspective, we also find confirmation that service quality (in timeliness and reliability) underlies citizen satisfaction. The fact that our service quality ratings (Fig. 3 ) were mostly positive suggests that Huduma has indeed moved the needle for many users. However, digital divide theory reminds us that these gains have been uneven: urban, younger, and digitally literate respondents dominate our sample, yet national data show large swaths of Kenyans face serious access obstacles. In practice, this means our findings likely paint a best-case scenario; the real situation for rural and disadvantaged citizens is probably more challenging than our numbers indicate. Conclusion This study explored how Kenyans perceive e-Governance platforms (Huduma and e-Citizen) amid major public sector reforms. Our survey of 36 citizens found high awareness and generally positive user experience, with most respondents rating services as good and having successfully accessed key public services online or at Huduma Centres. However, substantial issues remain: long wait times, system outages, and digital skill gaps were frequently reported. A majority of respondents indicated that the digital platforms had significantly reduced corruption or were fully inclusive for vulnerable groups. Moreover, most were well informed about the ongoing 2024–25 reform agenda, and many were optimistic that Huduma/e-Governance could help drive better governance while addressing underlying problems. In sum, Kenya’s Huduma initiative and e-Citizen portal are recognized by citizens and often function effectively, fulfilling the goal of bringing services closer to people. Yet our results suggest that to complete the “digital transformation,” policymakers must still invest heavily in infrastructure, training, and outreach. The findings align with official plans (e.g. Huduma Digitalization strategy) that emphasize connectivity and capacity-building. As Kenya continues public sector reforms, ensuring that these digital channels actually improve service delivery for all will require bridging the rural-urban digital divide and building public trust. Recommendations Based on the results, we offer several recommendations for policymakers and practitioners: Expand Internet Access and Infrastructure : Prioritize investment in broadband connectivity, particularly in rural and underserved counties. Consider public-private partnerships to subsidize rural base stations or fiber networks. As one respondent noted, improving last-mile connectivity and providing affordable data will enable more Kenyans to use e-services. Increase Huduma Centre Reach : Build additional Huduma Centers or mobile “Huduma on Wheels” units in remote locations. Ensuring that every constituency has a center (a suggestion echoed by respondents) would reduce travel burdens and decongest existing centers. The government’s pledge to establish Huduma in all counties should be implemented swiftly. Enhance Digital Literacy Programs : Launch nationwide training and awareness campaigns to teach citizens how to use e-Citizen. These could include workshops in communities, instructional media, and deploying “digital ambassadors” to assist first-time users. The survey respondents overwhelmingly identified digital literacy as the top priority (74%); this underscores the need for meaningful public education. Strengthen Service Quality Standards : Enforce accountability and performance standards for Huduma staff and systems. Reducing wait times may require process optimization (e.g. appointment scheduling, increased staffing during peak periods) and reliable IT infrastructure (redundant servers, backup power). The creation of national “Customer Service Excellence” benchmarks, as proposed in official plans, should be operationalized and monitored. Promote Transparency and Feedback Channels : Publicize data on service delivery timelines, processing rates, and budgets (e.g. how service fees are used). Encourage citizen feedback through online surveys and hotlines. Building trust in digital services goes beyond technology; it entails demonstrating accountability, as several respondents noted concerns over corruption and data security. Target Inclusion of Marginalized Groups : Implement measures for populations at risk of exclusion. For example, ensure that elder-friendly and disability-accessible interfaces are available, and consider legacy (non-digital) support such as community kiosks with assistance. The government’s digital inclusion commitments should translate to concrete policies, such as subsidized devices or targeted Wi-Fi hotspots in low-income areas. Limitations Several limitations of this study should be noted. First, the sample size was small (n = 39) and obtained via convenience sampling, which may not be representative of Kenya’s broader population. The over-representation of youth and better-educated individuals suggests bias toward citizens already comfortable with technology, so our positive satisfaction ratings might overstate national averages. Second, the online questionnaire format inherently excludes those without internet access. Thus, our findings likely underestimate the challenges faced by the digitally disconnected – exactly those whose inclusion we wish to study. Third, because the survey was cross-sectional and self-reported, it captures perceptions at a single point in time and may be influenced by recent service experiences or media coverage. Finally, the questionnaire did not probe deeply into some nuanced issues (e.g. detailed demographic differences or service types beyond a checklist). Despite these caveats, the study provides a useful snapshot of current public sentiment and generates hypotheses for further research. Future Research Future studies should aim for larger and more diverse samples, possibly combining online surveys with in-person interviews in rural areas. Longitudinal research could track whether attitudes change as reforms progress and as infrastructure improves. Qualitative approaches (focus groups, ethnographies) would deepen understanding of citizens’ experiences, especially among the elderly or disabled. Comparative studies across different countries or East African neighbors could contextualize Kenya’s performance regionally. Finally, impact assessments using administrative data (e.g., service processing times, corruption complaint rates) could complement citizen surveys to provide a fuller evaluation of e-Governance effectiveness post-reforms. Declarations Authors contributions: Corresponding Author (MARK KIBOR KEMBOI) -data collection -manuscript preparation -data interpretation -writing of the original draft 2. Co-Author (PETETI PREMANANDAM) -Reviewing and editing of the manuscript -proofreading -Grammar check -advise on paper preparation Funding Declaration The authors declare that no external funding was received for conducting this study. Clinical trial number Clinical trial number not applicable Consent to Publish Consent to publish declaration not applicable Consent to Participate Declaration Consent to Participate Declaration not applicable Ethics Declaration The research instrument used for this study was ethically approved by the NACOSTI (National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation)-Kenya, with Ethical approval NO: NACOSTI/P/24/14324/23555. Consent was obtained from all the participants during data collection. References Asiligwa, M. (2016). Adoption of e-governance in the public sector: A case of Nairobi City County (Master’s thesis). Kenyatta University. Retrieved August 23, 2025, from https://ir-library.ku.ac.ke/handle/123456789/22400 Digital Marketing Services. (2025, February 13). Transforming public service delivery: The Huduma Kenya digitalization plan. Digital Media Kenya. Retrieved August 23, 2025, from https://digitalmediakenya.co.ke/huduma-kenya-digitalization-plan/ Gatobu, P. K., & Muthini, J. N. (2021). E-government to citizens model and service delivery by Government of Kenya. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 5 (6), 554–558. https://rsisinternational.org Ministry of Public Service and Human Capital Development (Kenya). (2025, June 13). Day 2 APSD highlights: Inclusive governance & digital transformation. Government of Kenya. Retrieved August 23, 2025, from https://mps.go.ke/day-2-apsd-highlights-inclusive-governance-digital-transformation Mulindwa, C. (2025, June 16). Existing inequalities perpetuated by government digital services in Kenya. CIPIT – Strathmore University. Retrieved August 23, 2025, from https://cipit.strathmore.edu/existing-inequalities-perpetuated-by-government-digital-services-in-kenya/ Mwendwa, G. F., & Kandiri, J. M. (2025). Citizen satisfaction with electronic-government services: A case study of Huduma Centre Mombasa. International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology, 10 (4), 937–949. https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr638 Okello, F. (2024). Bridging Kenya’s digital divide: Context, barriers and strategies (Digital Policy Hub Discussion Paper). Centre for International Governance Innovation. Retrieved August 23, 2025, from https://www.cigionline.org/publications/bridging-kenyas-digital-divide Open Government Partnership. (n.d.). Kenya Action Plan 2023–2027: Safe and responsible digital transformation (Commitment KE0033). Retrieved August 23, 2025, from https://www.opengovpartnership.org/members/kenya/commitments/ke0033/ Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files AppendixA.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 30 Sep, 2025 Reviews received at journal 13 Sep, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 02 Sep, 2025 Reviews received at journal 08 Aug, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 07 Aug, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 07 Aug, 2025 Editor invited by journal 17 Jul, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 01 Jul, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 01 Jul, 2025 First submitted to journal 23 Jun, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6953581","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Case Report","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":497901260,"identity":"6ee8ca52-8a85-4ed0-8982-cbe5a50e08f9","order_by":0,"name":"Mark Kibor Kemboi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Jaramogi Oginga Odinga University of Science and Technology","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mark","middleName":"Kibor","lastName":"Kemboi","suffix":""},{"id":497901261,"identity":"0d615d3f-9e1c-4291-9f62-d7b986c4a79c","order_by":1,"name":"Peteti Premanandam","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Andhra University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Peteti","middleName":"","lastName":"Premanandam","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-06-23 06:53:31","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6953581/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6953581/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":88950991,"identity":"6f8fd0f6-db49-44c8-b05e-2b9640ec24dc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-13 05:50:53","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":144491,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRespondent demographics (N=39):\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6953581/v1/a1c15473f1c577001d434a41.png"},{"id":88952063,"identity":"71a2217d-4e4a-4401-91ef-633cf35d0836","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-13 05:58:53","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":93083,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eService usage via Huduma/e-Citizen (N=39): percentage of respondents who accessed each service in the last 12 months.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6953581/v1/3a1a56e551dfd2493e07f191.png"},{"id":88950994,"identity":"b5b988bc-7123-470a-921c-fe59940bf9ef","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-13 05:50:53","extension":"jpg","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":33801,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFigure 3, a: \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e(N=39): \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;overall experience with Huduma or eCitizen services\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6953581/v1/5a9f1d144f926e38ee065798.jpg"},{"id":88950997,"identity":"86f144cb-a084-4dcf-b0e0-6b70f97bbd74","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-13 05:50:53","extension":"jpg","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":51123,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFigure 3.\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cem\u003e(b) Challenges encountered.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6953581/v1/98b3989f176c8021de8af417.jpg"},{"id":88950999,"identity":"7422ee1f-3655-420c-b713-fe6fbe644d83","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-13 05:50:53","extension":"jpg","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":47175,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFigure 3c\u003c/strong\u003e: \u003cstrong\u003ePerceptions of Corruption\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"5.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6953581/v1/710ca9be929db901425ac2a6.jpg"},{"id":88952071,"identity":"bd49f9b4-2f98-4fd7-b2c4-439120881ad1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-13 05:58:53","extension":"jpg","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":27482,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFigure 3d: Perceptions of inclusivity for all citizens\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"6.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6953581/v1/4668c74c285e29ea98491618.jpg"},{"id":88952066,"identity":"f5099ded-00ac-4a83-b7e0-ecf925b76ba1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-13 05:58:53","extension":"jpg","order_by":7,"title":"Figure 7","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":29253,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFigure 4. a: \u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAwareness of reforms and government priorities (N=39\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"7.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6953581/v1/f593360c1a3685ea4c0c6e0c.jpg"},{"id":88952065,"identity":"df9a26a9-8d33-44e2-aa15-37815e9ec786","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-13 05:58:53","extension":"jpg","order_by":8,"title":"Figure 8","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":27134,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFigure 4. a: Huduma and E-governance supporting better governance reforms(N=39}\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"8.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6953581/v1/9eb3f53962791495f3bfb8da.jpg"},{"id":88951003,"identity":"58b98e89-fe37-44fb-92c3-110d3ead5cc5","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-13 05:50:53","extension":"jpg","order_by":9,"title":"Figure 9","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":57326,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFigure 4. \u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(c) Recommended priorities for improving digital services (multiple responses allowed).\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"9.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6953581/v1/6fffe77281c702ce8bc6c44a.jpg"},{"id":88953012,"identity":"fa13f53f-f432-4efb-bd48-afcafea723df","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-13 06:14:54","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1534620,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6953581/v1/36988af2-82ef-41fc-89af-55d9aa408a75.pdf"},{"id":88952062,"identity":"5d889b74-b6ff-4ecc-9f5c-a1109c8b91a6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-13 05:58:53","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":15930,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"AppendixA.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6953581/v1/c0dab9f1333fa494c4a9aed5.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Reimagining Public Service Delivery in Kenya: Evaluating the Impact of E-Governance and Huduma Services Amidst the 2025 Public Sector Reforms","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eGovernments worldwide are increasingly turning to digital solutions to enhance public service delivery, improve transparency, and engage citizens more effectively. In Kenya, the Huduma Kenya initiative, launched in 2013\u0026ndash;2014, epitomizes this trend by providing \u0026ldquo;one-stop-shop\u0026rdquo; access to multiple government services from a single location. Complementing Huduma\u0026rsquo;s physical centers, the e-Citizen portal serves as a unified digital platform offering thousands of government services online. Together, these platforms are intended to reduce inefficiencies, cut costs, and curb corruption by minimizing human queues and paperwork. For example, the government\u0026rsquo;s recent Huduma Kenya digitalization plan aims to automate 80% of critical services and introduce innovations like self-service kiosks and \u0026ldquo;Huduma on Wheels\u0026rdquo; (mobile units).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eNevertheless, Kenya\u0026rsquo;s ambitious digital agenda faces challenges. Significant segments of the population remain unconnected or lack digital skills. Nearly 71% of Kenyans live in rural areas with limited broadband access, and high data costs have placed Kenya among the most expensive in East Africa. The government itself acknowledges that rapid digitization risks leaving disadvantaged groups \u0026ldquo;behind\u0026rdquo; unless measures ensure inclusivity. In this context, understanding citizen perceptions of e-government initiatives is critical. Our study explores Kenyan public attitudes toward Huduma and e-Citizen services during the rollout of the 2025 public sector reforms. Specifically, we investigate: (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) levels of awareness and usage of e-Gov platforms; (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) user satisfaction and perceived barriers; (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) beliefs about corruption reduction and inclusivity; and (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e) opinions on how these platforms can support the new reform agenda. By combining these citizen viewpoints with existing studies and theoretical insights, we aim to inform policymakers on how best to refine Kenya\u0026rsquo;s digital service strategy.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Literature Review","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eE-Government and Service Delivery.\u003c/b\u003e Broadly, e-government is posited to enhance public service efficiency, effectiveness, and transparency by leveraging ICT tools. Scholars note that when citizens can access services online or at integrated centers, administrative costs and bureaucratic hurdles tend to fall. For example, Gatobu and Muthini (2021) found in Embu County that the use of the e-Citizen portal significantly improved citizen satisfaction with service delivery, reducing wait times and perceived corruption. Similarly, a case study of a Huduma Centre in Mombasa revealed that a majority of respondents saw e-government adoption as bolstering the efficiency and reliability of services. The Huduma Kenya program itself was designed to \u0026ldquo;bring many government services into one location,\u0026rdquo; literally implementing the \u0026ldquo;one-stop-shop\u0026rdquo; model to overcome past inefficiencies. These initiatives reflect Kenya\u0026rsquo;s alignment with broader global trends of citizen-centric public administration (Huduma centers are often cited as part of the Vision 2030 agenda).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHowever, independent reviews and academic analyses temper these optimistic narratives. Some research suggests that e-government efforts in Kenya have been hampered by infrastructure gaps and limited user readiness. For instance, Gatobu and Muthini note persistent project failures and \u0026ldquo;ineffective and inadequate use of e-government services\u0026rdquo; despite multi-million-dollar investments. Other studies highlight that rural populations, women, the elderly, and the poor are less likely to benefit from digital platforms, due to a lack of internet, devices, or relevant skills. A recent blog by Strathmore University\u0026rsquo;s CIPIT observes that although platforms like e-Citizen and Huduma Kenya have proliferated, \u0026ldquo;not all Kenyan citizens have reliable internet access or own internet-enabled devices,\u0026rdquo; meaning that \u0026ldquo;significant disparities persist in access, connectivity, and digital literacy. In sum, the literature suggests that while Kenyan e-government programs have \u003cem\u003epotential\u003c/em\u003e, their impact depends heavily on addressing the digital divide and service quality.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eDigital Divide and Inclusion.\u003c/b\u003e Digital inclusion is a central theme in Kenya\u0026rsquo;s tech-policy discourse. The Open Government Partnership\u0026rsquo;s Action Plan explicitly frames \u0026ldquo;safe, responsible and human rights-centered digital transformation\u0026rdquo; as a national commitment, aiming to bridge exclusion in digital services. These documents report that, by 2023, only about one-third of Kenyans had internet access, and the government had digitized roughly 5,000 services (targeting 12,000 by 2023). Meanwhile, studies by organizations like CIGI find that rural\u0026ndash;urban disparities remain stark: about 70.7% of Kenyans live in rural areas, where broadband adoption is far lower than in cities. This gap \u0026ldquo;limits access to financial, education, health-care, and administrative services\u0026rdquo; for rural Kenyans. Income and poverty also interplay strongly: Strathmore CIPIT notes that remote counties with high poverty (e.g., Turkana, Samburu) have internet usage below 40%, while wealthy urban counties (Nairobi, Kiambu) far exceed the national average. Such evidence underlines warnings that unchecked digital initiatives could \u0026ldquo;perpetuate existing inequalities\u0026rdquo; if infrastructure and outreach do not target marginalized communities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eHuduma Kenya in Reform.\u003c/b\u003e The government recognizes these challenges and has articulated ambitious strategies. Kenya\u0026rsquo;s Huduma Digitalization Plan (2025) envisions new service platforms (kiosks, virtual centers, Huduma Mashinani mobile units) and a \u0026ldquo;universal agent\u0026rdquo; model where a single staffer can handle multiple services. The plan also emphasizes robust cybersecurity, data protection, and user support standards. Furthermore, the 2025 Public Service reforms, following a 2024 Cabinet reshuffle, are intended to reorganize ministries and accelerate efficiency (e.g., establishing Huduma centers in all counties). However, public awareness of these reform efforts appears low: as we will show, most citizens surveyed were not familiar with the new initiatives. The literature indicates that stakeholders see Huduma and e-Citizen as critical linchpins for achieving the reforms\u0026rsquo; goals of transparency and citizen participation. Therefore, understanding current citizen experiences and perceptions is crucial for evaluating whether Kenya is on track to reap the promised benefits of e-governance under its new policy agenda.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eTheoretical Framework\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study is informed by theories of technology adoption and service satisfaction. In particular, the \u003cb\u003eUnified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT)\u003c/b\u003e provides a lens for analyzing how expectations, ease-of-use, social factors, and support conditions influence the uptake of e-government services. UTAUT and related models (such as TAM and Expectation-Confirmation Theory) have been widely applied in e-government research. For instance, Oliveira et al. (2021) and others show that user satisfaction with digital services is mediated by service quality, perceived value, and actual system performance. Our questionnaire draws partly on this tradition by asking respondents about their prior experience and perceived hurdles (which relate to facilitating conditions and effort expectancy). Additionally, concepts from digital divide theory frame our analysis of inclusivity. We consider variables such as rural vs. urban residence and literacy level (Table\u0026nbsp;1) in light of findings that these correlate with e-service usage. Finally, we adopt a citizen-centric view of public services: client satisfaction theory suggests that timely, reliable, and transparent services improve perceptions of government legitimacy. In practice, we interpret our results through these dual lenses: how citizens perceive ease and usefulness of e-services (adoption theory) and how any barriers they face reflect broader structural inequalities (digital divide theory).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Methodology","content":"\u003cp\u003eWe conducted a cross-sectional survey targeting Kenyan residents aged 18 and above. Data collection was carried out via a structured online questionnaire between June 2025 and July 2025. The questionnaire (Appendix) covered demographics (age, gender, location, education, employment), awareness and usage of Huduma/e-Citizen services, satisfaction ratings, experienced challenges, perceptions of corruption and inclusivity, and views on recent reforms. Participants were recruited through convenience sampling using social media platforms by sharing the questionnaire links for easy responses; participation was voluntary and anonymous. In total, 39 valid responses were obtained. The sample characteristics are summarized in Table\u0026nbsp;1. Data analysis was primarily descriptive. We computed frequencies and percentages for each survey item and constructed charts to visualize key distributions. Likert-scale items on experience and corruption were treated as categorical for reporting purposes (no inferential tests were conducted due to the limited sample size). Open-ended suggestions and comments (e.g. \u0026ldquo;What would you suggest to improve digital services?\u0026rdquo;) were reviewed qualitatively to identify common themes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe reliability of our survey instrument was ensured by pilot testing it with a small group (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10) before full deployment. Questions were adapted from existing e-government satisfaction scales and tailored to the Kenyan Huduma context. This research design is consistent with other studies of Huduma services (e.g. Gatobu \u0026amp; Muthini 2021; Mwendwa \u0026amp; Kandiri 2025) that have used Huduma center surveys and case studies. However, the convenience sampling and online mode likely skewed the sample toward younger and more literate respondents. We acknowledge this limitation in the Discussion section. All procedures complied with ethical standards: informed consent was obtained at the survey start, and no personal identifiers were collected.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eRespondent Profile\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eAge\u003c/b\u003e: Respondents were predominantly young. Over half (51%) were aged 25\u0026ndash;34, 28% were 28\u0026ndash;24, 18% were 35\u0026ndash;44, and 3% were 45\u0026ndash;54; no respondents were aged 55 and above. No respondents were older than 34. \u003cb\u003eGender\u003c/b\u003e: The majority (72%) were male, with 28% female; no participants identified as other or preferred not to say. \u003cb\u003eLocation\u003c/b\u003e: 64% of respondents lived in urban areas, while 36% were rural; none reported residing in informal settlements. \u003cb\u003eEducation and Employment\u003c/b\u003e: Most had a university degree (54%); 31% had postgraduate education, 10% had tertiary (college or university) education, and 5% had secondary education. No respondents reported formal education, likely reflecting our convenience sample. In terms of employment, 51% were students, 26% worked in the public sector, 13% in the private sector, and 10% were unemployed. No respondents were unemployed. Table\u0026nbsp;1 and the pie charts in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e summarize these demographics.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e \u003cem\u003e(below) illustrates the distribution of respondents by age group, gender, Location, education, and employment status. Also below the tables is a pie chart representation of the same information in the table. Notably, the sample skews female and heavily young adult, which may reflect the networks through which the survey circulated. These demographic trends help contextualize subsequent findings: for example, younger and better-educated citizens may have different levels of digital literacy and trust in e-services than older, less educated cohorts (a point we revisit in the Discussion).\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. Demographic Profile of Respondents (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;39)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Taba\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCategory\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePercentage (%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e25\u0026ndash;34\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e51\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e18\u0026ndash;24\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e35\u0026ndash;44\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e18\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e45\u0026ndash;54\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e55 and above\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e72\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eOther / Prefer not to say\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLocation\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eUrban\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e64\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRural\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e36\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eInformal settlements\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eEducation\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSecondary education\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTertiary (college/university)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eUniversity degree\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e54\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePostgraduate\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e31\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNo formal education\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eEmployment\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eStudent\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e51\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePublic sector\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePrivate sector\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAwareness and Usage of Huduma/E-Citizen Services\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll 39 respondents reported awareness of Huduma Centres or the e-Citizen portal, reflecting strong penetration of the program (in line with government claims of widespread publicity). Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e shows which services respondents have accessed through Huduma or e-Citizen in the past 12 months (multiple selections allowed). The most commonly used services were Passport applications and KRA/PIN tax services (selected by 46% and 49% of respondents, respectively), followed by National ID issuance (28%), Driving License services, and Birth/Death certificates (26% each). Business registration (23%). while NHIF/NSSF contributions (21%). Only 10% reported accessing \u0026ldquo;other\u0026rdquo; services outside the main categories. These patterns align with the idea that highly demanded government documents (IDs, passports, tax records) have been digitized.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePractically all respondents (97%) had used at least one Huduma/e-Citizen service in the past year. Most first experiences occurred at Huduma centres (physical offices) rather than online. For example, passports and national ID cards still require in-person submission despite online pre-registration in some cases.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eOverall Experience and Challenges\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRespondents rated their overall experience with Huduma or e-Citizen services on a five-point scale. The results (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, a) were generally positive: 87% rated the service \u0026ldquo;Excellent\u0026rdquo; (32%) or \u0026ldquo;Good\u0026rdquo; (55%), and 13% rated it \u0026ldquo;Average.\u0026rdquo; Notably, none rated their experience as \u0026ldquo;Poor\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;Very Poor.\u0026rdquo; This indicates a majority satisfaction.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite the fairly good ratings, many respondents reported challenges. As shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e (a), the most frequently cited problem was long waiting times (74% of respondents), followed by system downtime or website errors (31%). Approximately 26% noted poor internet connectivity as a barrier, 10% reported \u0026ldquo;unfriendly staff\u0026rdquo;, 8% reported lack of digital literacy, and 3% Language barrier. 8% selected none. In summary, three-quarters of users experienced at least one significant issue.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese findings suggest that while the e-Government platforms work satisfactorily for most citizens when they do work, operational hurdles remain a major concern. Long queues at physical Huduma centres (despite one-stop design) and periodic online outages undermine efficiency. Such bottlenecks have been noted in other studies: for example, the Mombasa Huduma case reported that the system freezes, and data glitches erode user satisfaction. Our survey data corroborate that technology access (connectivity and uptime) and process flow (staff efficiency) are critical determinants of the citizen experience.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003ePerceptions of Corruption and Inclusion\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe asked whether respondents believe Huduma/e-Governance platforms have reduced corruption in service delivery. 15% \u0026ldquo;strongly agree\u0026rdquo; and 49% \u0026ldquo;agree\u0026rdquo; that corruption is reduced, while 23% remained neutral, 13% disagreed, and 3% strongly disagreed. In practical terms, 16% of respondents expressed skepticism (disagree/strongly disagree) about corruption reduction. This mixed sentiment aligns with broader analyses suggesting that digital portals can reduce petty bribery by limiting face-to-face interactions, but that broader governance reforms are still needed for wholesale impact.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe also probed whether digital platforms are inclusive for all Kenyans, including the elderly, disabled, and rural poor. Responses were similarly divided: 51% of respondents answered \u0026ldquo;Yes,\u0026rdquo; whereas 13% answered \u0026ldquo;Not sure\u0026rdquo; and 36% answered \u0026ldquo;No.\u0026rdquo; Thus, more than half doubted that current e-services fully reach marginalized groups. These points concern from digital divide research. For instance, Okello (2024) notes that rural infrastructure gaps and limited device ownership mean many citizens cannot \u0026ldquo;meaningfully engage\u0026rdquo; with e-government. Likewise, Strathmore CIPIT highlights that counties with low income and sparse networks remain excluded. Our findings reinforce that perception gap: even among our relatively young and educated sample, majorities worry that older or disabled Kenyans might be left out by a predominantly online service model.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAwareness of Reforms and Reform Support\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eFinally, we asked about awareness of the 2024 Cabinet reshuffle and 2025 public sector reforms, and whether respondents felt Huduma/e-Governance could support better governance under these reforms. 67% of respondents said they were \u0026ldquo;Yes\u0026rdquo; aware of the reforms; 21% said \u0026ldquo;No,\u0026rdquo; and 13% said \u0026ldquo;Somewhat\u0026rdquo; aware. This indicates that about two-thirds of citizens had at best information about these changes. In other words, the reform drive appears to have reached mass public consciousness by mid-2025.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhen asked if Huduma and e-Citizen services can support better governance under the new reforms, 69% said \u0026ldquo;Yes,\u0026rdquo; while 5% said \u0026ldquo;No,\u0026rdquo; and 26% were uncertain. Thus, about three-quarters of respondents applauded that existing e-services alone would translate the reforms into improved outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eSuggested Improvements and Priorities\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn open-ended responses, many participants suggested concrete improvements. Common themes included expanding internet access, improving network reliability, and enhancing digital literacy training. Several respondents advocated for increasing rural connectivity (\u0026ldquo;improve network connectivity in rural areas\u0026rdquo;), deploying agents or kiosks to help those without devices, and making fees transparent. Some emphasized non-technical fixes as well (e.g., \u0026ldquo;staff accountability,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;reduce waiting periods,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;avoid system jams\u0026rdquo;), echoing the quantitative results.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhen asked specifically what the government\u0026rsquo;s top priorities should be for improving digital service delivery, respondents selected multiple areas. Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e (right) aggregates these selections. The clear top priority was \u003cb\u003e\u0026ldquo;\u003c/b\u003eDigital literacy and public awareness\u0026rdquo; (chosen by 72% of respondents). This suggests citizens believe training and education are critical for inclusive e-Government. Next was infrastructure and internet access (56%), followed closely by rural outreach and inclusion initiatives (51%). Over 46% also stressed staff training and accountability, and 36% selected system upgrades and integration (e.g. backend improvements). These priorities reinforce that users see both \u003cem\u003ehuman factors\u003c/em\u003e (education, accountability) and \u003cem\u003etechnical factors\u003c/em\u003e (connectivity, systems) as essential levers.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eOur findings reveal a nuanced picture of e-Governance in Kenya. On one hand, awareness of Huduma and e-Citizen is pervasive among participants, and most have used such services. This suggests that the government\u0026rsquo;s public information campaigns and rollout have achieved broad visibility. The high usage of key services (IDs, passports, tax registration) confirms that the platforms are fulfilling citizen demand for vital documents. Importantly, a strong majority rated their experience as at least \u0026ldquo;Good,\u0026rdquo; indicating general functionality. These positive outcomes echo previous studies of Huduma centres, which similarly found that co-locating services reduced travel burdens and waiting for users.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOn the other hand, our data underscore significant challenges. Most salient are infrastructure and usability barriers. Even within our likely tech-savvy sample, 74% reported waiting-time delays and 31% reported outages. These figures align with established research: the CIPIT blog noted Kenya\u0026rsquo;s high broadband costs and patchy rural coverage, and our respondents\u0026rsquo; concerns about connectivity mirror that. If well-informed, rural residents currently experience frustration rather than efficiency gains from e-Government. Similarly, 72% emphasizing digital literacy shows awareness that connectivity alone is insufficient \u0026ndash; citizens also need training and user support, especially in underserved areas. The Kenyan digitalization plan\u0026rsquo;s focus on capacity building and accessibility, like service kiosks seems well-targeted to these gaps\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe data presented offers valuable insight into public perception regarding the role of Huduma and e-Governance platforms in curbing corruption within service delivery. A majority of respondents (64%, combining those who \u003cem\u003estrongly agree\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eagree\u003c/em\u003e) believe that these digital platforms have contributed to reducing corruption. This reflects a positive endorsement of the platforms' ability to minimize direct interactions between citizens and public officers \u0026mdash; interactions that often create opportunities for petty bribery.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHowever, a significant minority (16%) expressed skepticism, either \u003cem\u003edisagreeing\u003c/em\u003e or \u003cem\u003estrongly disagreeing\u003c/em\u003e that corruption has declined. Additionally, 23% remained neutral, suggesting uncertainty or perceived limited change. This distribution of views illustrates that while digital systems like Huduma and e-Citizen are seen by many as tools for enhancing transparency and accountability, they are not perceived as a complete solution to corruption challenges.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe mixed sentiment aligns with wider research on e-governance. It suggests that while technology can effectively reduce low-level, transactional corruption by automating services and reducing discretionary power at service points, the persistence of corruption at systemic levels requires deeper institutional reforms, stronger enforcement mechanisms, and sustained political will. In the context of this case, the findings highlight that digital innovations are a step forward but must be complemented by broader governance strategies to achieve meaningful and lasting reductions in corruption.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFinally, the glaring lack of awareness about the 2024-25 reforms themselves points to a disconnect between government agendas and citizen engagement. Despite the symposiums and policy discussions (such as APSD 2025) emphasizing innovation, everyday citizens do not know what is happening. This may undermine reform momentum: an engaged public is needed to hold institutions accountable and provide feedback. Our respondents\u0026rsquo; call for public awareness as the top priority highlights this gap. It suggests that without sustained outreach, the transformative potential of reforms (including digital components) may not be realized.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn light of theory, these results are intuitive. UTAUT would predict that facilitating conditions (connectivity, training) and performance expectancy (user satisfaction) heavily drive usage. Here, we see that where conditions falter (poor internet, untrained staff), intent to use and trust wane (evident in low reform buy-in). From a public administration perspective, we also find confirmation that service quality (in timeliness and reliability) underlies citizen satisfaction. The fact that our service quality ratings (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) were mostly positive suggests that Huduma has indeed moved the needle for many users. However, digital divide theory reminds us that these gains have been uneven: urban, younger, and digitally literate respondents dominate our sample, yet national data show large swaths of Kenyans face serious access obstacles. In practice, this means our findings likely paint a best-case scenario; the real situation for rural and disadvantaged citizens is probably more challenging than our numbers indicate.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study explored how Kenyans perceive e-Governance platforms (Huduma and e-Citizen) amid major public sector reforms. Our survey of 36 citizens found high awareness and generally positive user experience, with most respondents rating services as good and having successfully accessed key public services online or at Huduma Centres. However, substantial issues remain: long wait times, system outages, and digital skill gaps were frequently reported. A majority of respondents indicated that the digital platforms had significantly reduced corruption or were fully inclusive for vulnerable groups. Moreover, most were well informed about the ongoing 2024\u0026ndash;25 reform agenda, and many were optimistic that Huduma/e-Governance could help drive better governance while addressing underlying problems.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn sum, Kenya\u0026rsquo;s Huduma initiative and e-Citizen portal are recognized by citizens and often function effectively, fulfilling the goal of bringing services closer to people. Yet our results suggest that to complete the \u0026ldquo;digital transformation,\u0026rdquo; policymakers must still invest heavily in infrastructure, training, and outreach. The findings align with official plans (e.g. Huduma Digitalization strategy) that emphasize connectivity and capacity-building. As Kenya continues public sector reforms, ensuring that these digital channels actually \u003cem\u003eimprove service delivery for all\u003c/em\u003e will require bridging the rural-urban digital divide and building public trust.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eRecommendations\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eBased on the results, we offer several recommendations for policymakers and practitioners:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eExpand Internet Access and Infrastructure\u003c/b\u003e: Prioritize investment in broadband connectivity, particularly in rural and underserved counties. Consider public-private partnerships to subsidize rural base stations or fiber networks. As one respondent noted, improving last-mile connectivity and providing affordable data will enable more Kenyans to use e-services.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eIncrease Huduma Centre Reach\u003c/b\u003e: Build additional Huduma Centers or mobile \u0026ldquo;Huduma on Wheels\u0026rdquo; units in remote locations. Ensuring that every constituency has a center (a suggestion echoed by respondents) would reduce travel burdens and decongest existing centers. The government\u0026rsquo;s pledge to establish Huduma in all counties should be implemented swiftly.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eEnhance Digital Literacy Programs\u003c/b\u003e: Launch nationwide training and awareness campaigns to teach citizens how to use e-Citizen. These could include workshops in communities, instructional media, and deploying \u0026ldquo;digital ambassadors\u0026rdquo; to assist first-time users. The survey respondents overwhelmingly identified digital literacy as the top priority (74%); this underscores the need for meaningful public education.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eStrengthen Service Quality Standards\u003c/b\u003e: Enforce accountability and performance standards for Huduma staff and systems. Reducing wait times may require process optimization (e.g. appointment scheduling, increased staffing during peak periods) and reliable IT infrastructure (redundant servers, backup power). The creation of national \u0026ldquo;Customer Service Excellence\u0026rdquo; benchmarks, as proposed in official plans, should be operationalized and monitored.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePromote Transparency and Feedback Channels\u003c/b\u003e: Publicize data on service delivery timelines, processing rates, and budgets (e.g. how service fees are used). Encourage citizen feedback through online surveys and hotlines. Building trust in digital services goes beyond technology; it entails demonstrating accountability, as several respondents noted concerns over corruption and data security.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTarget Inclusion of Marginalized Groups\u003c/b\u003e: Implement measures for populations at risk of exclusion. For example, ensure that elder-friendly and disability-accessible interfaces are available, and consider legacy (non-digital) support such as community kiosks with assistance. The government\u0026rsquo;s digital inclusion commitments should translate to concrete policies, such as subsidized devices or targeted Wi-Fi hotspots in low-income areas.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eLimitations\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eSeveral limitations of this study should be noted. First, the sample size was small (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;39) and obtained via convenience sampling, which may not be representative of Kenya\u0026rsquo;s broader population. The over-representation of youth and better-educated individuals suggests bias toward citizens already comfortable with technology, so our positive satisfaction ratings might overstate national averages. Second, the online questionnaire format inherently excludes those without internet access. Thus, our findings likely underestimate the challenges faced by the digitally disconnected \u0026ndash; exactly those whose inclusion we wish to study. Third, because the survey was cross-sectional and self-reported, it captures perceptions at a single point in time and may be influenced by recent service experiences or media coverage. Finally, the questionnaire did not probe deeply into some nuanced issues (e.g. detailed demographic differences or service types beyond a checklist). Despite these caveats, the study provides a useful snapshot of current public sentiment and generates hypotheses for further research.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eFuture Research\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eFuture studies should aim for larger and more diverse samples, possibly combining online surveys with in-person interviews in rural areas. Longitudinal research could track whether attitudes change as reforms progress and as infrastructure improves. Qualitative approaches (focus groups, ethnographies) would deepen understanding of citizens\u0026rsquo; experiences, especially among the elderly or disabled. Comparative studies across different countries or East African neighbors could contextualize Kenya\u0026rsquo;s performance regionally. Finally, impact assessments using administrative data (e.g., service processing times, corruption complaint rates) could complement citizen surveys to provide a fuller evaluation of e-Governance effectiveness post-reforms.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors contributions:\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCorresponding Author (MARK KIBOR KEMBOI)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e-data collection\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e-manuscript preparation\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e-data interpretation\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e-writing of the original draft\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; 2. Co-Author (PETETI PREMANANDAM)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e-Reviewing and editing of the manuscript\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;-proofreading\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; -Grammar check\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; -advise on paper preparation\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding Declaration\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that no external funding was received for conducting this study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eClinical trial number\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eClinical trial number not applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent to Publish\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConsent to publish declaration not applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent to Participate Declaration\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConsent to Participate Declaration not applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics Declaration\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe research instrument used for this study was ethically approved by the NACOSTI (National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation)-Kenya, with Ethical approval NO: NACOSTI/P/24/14324/23555. Consent was obtained from all the participants during data collection.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAsiligwa, M. (2016). \u003cem\u003eAdoption of e-governance in the public sector: A case of Nairobi City County\u003c/em\u003e (Master\u0026rsquo;s thesis). Kenyatta University. Retrieved August 23, 2025, from https://ir-library.ku.ac.ke/handle/123456789/22400\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDigital Marketing Services. (2025, February 13). \u003cem\u003eTransforming public service delivery: The Huduma Kenya digitalization plan.\u003c/em\u003e Digital Media Kenya. Retrieved August 23, 2025, from https://digitalmediakenya.co.ke/huduma-kenya-digitalization-plan/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGatobu, P. K., \u0026amp; Muthini, J. N. (2021). E-government to citizens model and service delivery by Government of Kenya. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 5\u003c/em\u003e(6), 554\u0026ndash;558. https://rsisinternational.org\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMinistry of Public Service and Human Capital Development (Kenya). (2025, June 13). \u003cem\u003eDay 2 APSD highlights: Inclusive governance \u0026amp; digital transformation.\u003c/em\u003e Government of Kenya. Retrieved August 23, 2025, from https://mps.go.ke/day-2-apsd-highlights-inclusive-governance-digital-transformation\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMulindwa, C. (2025, June 16). \u003cem\u003eExisting inequalities perpetuated by government digital services in Kenya.\u003c/em\u003e CIPIT \u0026ndash; Strathmore University. Retrieved August 23, 2025, from https://cipit.strathmore.edu/existing-inequalities-perpetuated-by-government-digital-services-in-kenya/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMwendwa, G. F., \u0026amp; Kandiri, J. M. (2025). Citizen satisfaction with electronic-government services: A case study of Huduma Centre Mombasa. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology, 10\u003c/em\u003e(4), 937\u0026ndash;949. https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr638\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOkello, F. (2024). \u003cem\u003eBridging Kenya\u0026rsquo;s digital divide: Context, barriers and strategies\u003c/em\u003e (Digital Policy Hub Discussion Paper). Centre for International Governance Innovation. Retrieved August 23, 2025, from https://www.cigionline.org/publications/bridging-kenyas-digital-divide\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOpen Government Partnership. (n.d.). \u003cem\u003eKenya Action Plan 2023\u0026ndash;2027: Safe and responsible digital transformation (Commitment KE0033).\u003c/em\u003e Retrieved August 23, 2025, from https://www.opengovpartnership.org/members/kenya/commitments/ke0033/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-global-society","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Global Society](https://www.springer.com/journal/44282)","snPcode":"44282","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/44282/3","title":"Discover Global Society","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"E-governance, Huduma Centers, eCitizen platform, public service delivery, social equity","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6953581/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6953581/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis paper examines citizen perceptions of Kenya\u0026rsquo;s public service delivery in the context of recent governance reforms, focusing on digital platforms such as the Huduma Kenya programme and the national e-Citizen portal. Using a structured questionnaire, we surveyed Kenyan residents across urban and rural areas to evaluate awareness and usage of Huduma and e-Citizen services, satisfaction with these platforms, and attitudes toward corruption, inclusion, and ongoing reforms. Our results (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;39) show that most respondents are young adults, with a higher proportion of male (72%) than female (28%) participants. Nearly all respondents had used Huduma or e-Citizen services in the past year (100% awareness), primarily for passport application and tax registration services. Overall, the experience was rated mostly as \u0026ldquo;good\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;average\u0026rdquo; (over 80%), though long waiting times, system downtime, and poor internet connectivity were cited as major challenges. Most perceived that e-Government platforms have significantly reduced corruption (15% \u0026ldquo;strongly agree\u0026rdquo; and 49% \u0026ldquo;agree\u0026rdquo;) and expressed mixed views on digital inclusivity, although 51% cited \u0026ldquo;yes\u0026rdquo;. Notably, 67% felt sufficiently informed about the recent 2024 cabinet reshuffle and 2025 public service reforms, and 69% believed Huduma/e-Gov could support better governance under these reforms. When asked about priorities for improving digital services, respondents emphasized enhancing \u003cem\u003edigital literacy\u003c/em\u003e and public awareness (72% of respondents) and expanding \u003cem\u003einfrastructure and rural access\u003c/em\u003e (56%). These findings underscore that while Kenya\u0026rsquo;s digital service initiatives have raised public awareness and convenience, significant barriers remain in access and effectiveness, especially in marginalized communities. We discuss how the Huduma Kenya digitalization plan and broader e-government commitments aim to address these gaps (e.g., 80% of services automated, universal \u0026ldquo;one-stop\u0026rdquo; agents), and we situate our empirical results within theories of e-service adoption and the digital divide. The paper concludes with recommendations for policymakers on expanding connectivity, training, and community outreach to ensure that public sector reforms translate into inclusive improvements in service delivery.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Reimagining Public Service Delivery in Kenya: Evaluating the Impact of E-Governance and Huduma Services Amidst the 2025 Public Sector Reforms","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-08-13 05:50:48","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6953581/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2025-09-30T10:05:13+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-09-13T14:31:18+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"322371944879655827069286259436441822626","date":"2025-09-02T14:59:40+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-08-08T23:29:35+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"256122157979115607585625857773654954290","date":"2025-08-07T23:24:19+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-08-07T12:55:17+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2025-07-17T09:40:08+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-07-01T08:41:23+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-07-01T08:40:40+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Discover Global Society","date":"2025-06-23T06:50:03+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-global-society","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Global Society](https://www.springer.com/journal/44282)","snPcode":"44282","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/44282/3","title":"Discover Global Society","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"db4e0cfd-be6b-423a-bc8e-7ebaa49592c9","owner":[],"postedDate":"August 13th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-03-13T10:55:34+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-08-13 05:50:48","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6953581","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6953581","identity":"rs-6953581","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}