The survey found that COVID-19 continued to negatively impact rural households in Kenya. Around 80% of respondents reported losing income due to the pandemic. Main coping strategies included using savings, borrowing, selling assets, and consuming less food. Mobility remained restricted for most. Around half of respondents reported sickness in their household in the past two weeks. Food insecurity increased as many were unable to obtain nutritious foods or had to skip meals. Dietary diversity was low and declined further, especially among women.

1. Impact of COVID-19 on the welfare of
rural households in Kenya (round 2)
Michael K. Ndegwa
Pioneer Research and Empowerment Center (PioREC)
Funded by USAID

2. COVID-19 Kenya situation
▪ First case: March 13, 2020
▪ As of November 4, 2020, the
day of completion of this
report:
o 58,587 confirmed cases
(increased by 20,058
cases from the last report)
o 38,381 recoveries – 65.5%
recovery rate
o 1,051 711 deaths – 1.7%
fatality rate, which is
consistent with the last
report.
o The deaths increased by
346 from the last report
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
1
8
15
22
29
36
43
50
57
64
71
78
85
92
99
106
113
120
127
134
141
148
155
162
169
176
183
190
197
204
211
218
225
232
Kenya Covid-19 cases and deaths cumulative curves -
March 14 - Nov 4, 2020
Total cases Total deaths
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
800000
1
8
15
22
29
36
43
50
57
64
71
78
85
92
99
106
113
120
127
134
141
148
155
162
169
176
183
190
197
204
211
218
225
232
239
Total tests

3. 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
1
7
13
19
25
31
37
43
49
55
61
67
73
79
85
91
97
103
109
115
121
127
133
139
145
151
157
163
169
175
181
187
193
199
205
211
217
223
229
235
Kenya Covid-19 daily deaths from March 14 - November
4, 2020
New deaths New deaths smooth
COVID-19 Kenya situation
▪ Kenya had in the past few months enjoyed very low daily new cases being reported but in the
past fortnight, there have been a surge in new cases as well as Covid-19 related deaths.
▪ Kenya seems to be getting into a second wave of Covid-19 infections and most of the control
measures and movement restrictions which had been relaxed are being reintroduced.
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1
8
15
22
29
36
43
50
57
64
71
78
85
92
99
106
113
120
127
134
141
148
155
162
169
176
183
190
197
204
211
218
225
232
Kenya Covid-19 daily cases and deaths since March 14
- Nov 4, 2020
New cases New cases smoothed New deaths

4. Phone Survey
▪ This is the second phase of a three-round Covid-19 survey which builds on a
baseline dual-headed household survey conducted in January-February 2020
among a representative sample of rural farmers from Nakuru, Busia and Laikipia
counties in Kenya.
▪ Targeted one principal decision maker in a household, either male or female, 250 of
each gender.
▪ First round of phone survey conducted in mid September where 287 women and
261 men (548 total) completed the survey
▪ Second round conducted in end October where 263 women and 240 men (503
total) completed the survey.
▪ One more round of data collection anticipated by end of November 2020.
▪ Focus on behavioral responses to COVID-19, income changes, food and nutrition
security, water security, mobility, school program interruption
▪ An appreciation token of Ksh 200 ($2) was offered for each completed survey.

5. Survey implemented in
Busia, Laikipia and Nakuru
counties of Kenya

6. Location of respondents- Distribution across counties and
sub-counties
55 50 48
57 53
42
46 51
49 52
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Laikipia East Laikipia West Budalangi Molo Kuresoi North
Laikipia County Busia County Nakuru County
Proportionofhousehold
Female Male

7. Speaker phone turned on or off:
▪ Only 6% of respondents who had their speaker phone on
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Female respondent Male respondent Overall
Proportionofrespondents
Speaker phone turned off Speaker phone turned on

8. Challenges
▪ This time it was much smoother given that we were following up on those
interviewed at first round, and it was much easier to talk to participants
who had participated in a previous round.
▪ Despite this, there was attrition with several farmers not interested to
participate in the second round. Overall, we reached 503 out of 547
interviewed in first round: 8% attrition. We are still within the study targets.
▪ Phone survey time increased due to call drops, network issues and
unreached numbers. We worked with village elders to reach those who
we could not reach over the phone after multiple attempts.
▪ There were skirmishes in one village due to evictions from forest land. It
was much harder to reach respondents from this village.
▪ Some male respondents are somewhat uncomfortable responding to the
dietary diversity questions. If allowed, we plan to drop them for the final
round for men but still ask the women.

9. Income loss due to Covid-19
▪ 83% female and 79% male
reported loss of income due
to covid-19.
▪ This is roughly consistent
with first round where 85%
female and 82% male
suffered income loss due to
Covid-19 pandemic
▪ There was no statistically
significant differences
between respondents and
household heads gender
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Female Male Female Male
Gender of respondent Gender of household head
Proportionofhouseholds
Yes No

10. Mechanisms to cope with loss of income
▪ In line with the first-round results,
the main income loss coping
mechanisms were use of
savings, sale of assets,
borrowing, consuming less food
than usual and reducing
expenditure on food and nonfood
items.
▪ We see a larger proportion of
men then women engaging in
alternative jobs and/or working
more hours to cope with income
loss
▪ External support was still
uncommon, with government
transfers going down from 20%
in first round to 10% for women
and remaining steady at 10% for
men. Still less than 10% reported
receiving support from NGOs
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Used savings Reduced
expenditure
Borrowed Consumed
less
Found an
alternative
work/Worked
extra hours
Sold assets Got
government
cash transfer
Got NGO
cash transfer
Proportionofhouseholds
Female respondents Male respondents

11. Worked in the last 7 days
▪ The percentage of men able to work
has slightly increased from 88% in
the first round to 90% in second
round.
▪ The percentage of women able to
work reduced substantially from
82% in the first round to 63% in the
second round.
▪ Significantly more men than women
reported being able to work.
▪ Only 45% of men and 30% of
women who felt their work time was
uninterrupted.
▪ 36% of both said that they worked
fewer hours while 32% of women
and 18% of men said that they
worked more during the pandemic
than before
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Been able to work in the last 7
days (***)
Spouse been able to work in
the last 7 days
Proportionofhouseholds
Female Male

12. Time worked in the last 7 days compared to before COVID-19
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
More than before Less than before About the same as
before
More than before Less than before About the same as
before
Respondents working hours compared to before Covid 19
pandemic
Spouse working hours compared to before Covid 19 pandemic
Proportionofhouseholds
Female Male

13. Comparing mobility before and during Covid-19
▪ Mobility has not improved since the first
round with 89% indicating that their
mobility was curtailed by Covid-19 and
hence moved around less than before.
▪ Only 8% and 4% were able to move
normally or more than average
▪ In the past two weeks preceding the
survey, over three quarters had moved
out of their homes to attend religious
functions and to collect food.
▪ Men moved more than women to meet
friends, attend meetings and for
employment while women moved more
than men to collect water.
▪ 37% of both men and women had
moved out of their homes for medical
care.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Female Male TotalProportionofhouseholds
Are you able to get around more or less than
before Covid-19?
Less than before More than before About the same as before

14. Assessing mobility during Covid-19 pandemic
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Attend
religious
functions
Buy food Meet friends Attend
meeting
Employment Medical care Collect water Sell food
In the past two weeks, have you gone out of your home to: Can still
obtain
vegetables
and fruits for
your family
Proportionofhouseholds
Male respondents Female respondents

15. Hours spent caring for others in the household in the last 24 hours
▪ Time spent by women providing care
has remained consistent where they
reported spending 8 hours per day,
same as during the first round. Men
corroborate this stating that their
female spouses spent 7 hours
providing care.
▪ The time men spent providing care
has reduced from 7 hours to 5 hours
according to men’s report and from 5
hours to 2 hours according to
women’s report.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Female
(n=148)
Male
(n=162)
Total
(n=310)
Female
(n=263)
Male
(n=240)
Total
(n=503)
Conditional mean (p***) Overall mean (p**)
Hours
Respondent houses
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Female
(n=24)
Male
(n=185)
Total
(n=209)
Female
(n=151)
Male
(n=237)
Total
(n=388)
Conditional mean (p***) Overall mean (p***)
Hours
Spouse hours

16. Comparing caring hours in the last 24 hours with typical day before
Covid-19
▪ Half of the respondents felt the
hours they spent offering care were
more than a typical day before
Covid-19.
▪ 37% mean and 24% women felt
that the time they spent on care
was same as before while only less
than a quarter of both felt the time
spent on care was less than before
▪ Trend is similar when reporting
about their spouses where majority
said that their spouses spent either
the same or more hours on care
than before the pandemic
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
More than
before
Less than
before
About the
same as bef
More than
before
Less than
before
About the
same as bef
Respondent hours Spouse hours
Proportionofhouseholds
How does the hours spent offering care compare with a
typical day before Covid-19?
Female Male

17. Any sickness in the household in the last 2 weeks? (Yes)
▪ Roughly half of both men and
women sickness in the
households in the past 2
weeks preceding the survey.
▪ This was about 6-points
decrease for men and 1- point
increment for women from the
last survey.
▪ The disease burden was
slightly higher in male headed
households (50% for male
headed Vs 40% for female
headed), consistent with the
previous survey. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
By gender of the respondent By gender of the household head
Proportionofhouseholds
Female Male

18. Changes in food access since COVID19 affected communities
▪ The food access challenges
remain consistent from the
previous survey.
▪ More women (71%) than men
(68%) reported that their food
access had changed in some
ways.
▪ Over three quarters were unable
to obtain enough food while more
than half ate less food.
▪ Roughly half of women and a
third of men ate different food
types and got food from different
sources.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
My food
access
changed
Unable to
obtain
enough food
(**)
Eat less food Eat different
foods (***)
Get food
from different
sources (***)
Proportionofhouseholds
Male respondents Female respondents

19. Food insecurity experience, in the last 2 weeks,
due to lack of money or other resources:
▪ Food insecurity situation was
consistent with the preceding
survey where 50%:
o were unable to eat healthy
and nutritious food,
o were worried they would not
have enough food,
o ate less than they thought
they should.
▪ Significantly more men had to
skip a meal (p<5%) while
significantly more women were
at some point hungry but did not
eat (p<10).
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Unable to eat
healthy and
nutritious food
Worried you
would not have
enough food
Ate less than I
thought I
should
Had to skip a
meal (**)
Were hungry
but did not eat
(*)
Proportionofhouseholds
Female respondents Male respondents

20. Household Dietary Diversification by respondents’ gender – last 24 hours
▪ This was consistent with first round where:
▪ Significantly more men reported to have consumed most of the food types in their
households in the last 24 hours.
▪ There was over reliance on grains, dairy and dark leafy green and vegetables, hence low
dietary diversity
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Grains
Dark leafy greens and vegs (**)
Dairy (*)
Roots and tubers (***)
Other Vit A-rich fruits and vegs (***)
Pulses
Other vegetables (***)
Eggs (***)
Meat, poultry and fish (**)
Other fruits (**)
Nuts and seeds (***) Female respondents Male respondents

21. Household Dietary Diversity Index (HDDI) – 11 food items
▪ Consistent with first round:
▪ Men’s HDDI mean score was
significantly higher than that of
women – p<1%.
▪ Female headed households
consumed less diverse foods
compared to male headed
households – p<1%
▪ The Minimum Dietary Diversity
Score for Women (MDD-W)
showed that only about half of
the women consumed at least 5
food groups in the last 24 hours
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
5.0
5.1
5.2
By reposndent gender (***) By household head gender
(***)
HDDIscroe
Male Female

22. Dietary diversity score
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Proportionofhouseholds
Minimum Dietary Diversity Score for Women (MDD-W)
At least 5 food groups consumed in last 24 hours
MDD-W=0
53.2%
MDD-W=1
46.8%

23. Decision maker for respondent’s and spouse’s last two
weeks’ income
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Female
respondents
Male respondents Female
respondents
Male respondents
Who made decisions on own income Who made decisions on spouse's
income
Proportionofhouseholds
Respondent and spouse jointly Respondent Spouse Did not earn
▪ Substantially:
▪ more men (69%) than
women (17%) reported
that their personal
earnings are managed
jointly with their
spouses.
▪ more women (46%)
than men (21%) have
sole control over their
income.
▪ more women (34%)
than men (8%) did not
have any earning

24. Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Water from
Spring/river/lake/canal
Piped water Delivered waterProportionofhouseholds
Round1 Round2
▪ Consistent with round1
survey,
oa third of the households
got their drinking water
from dug wells and
boreholes and another
third from springs and
rivers.
oless than a fifth of
respondents had access
to piped water and a
similar proportion relied
on rainwater for drinking.

25. Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Female Male Female Male
How do your water
consumption now compare
to before Covid19?
How much of this change is
as a result of Covid19?
Proportionofhouseholds
More than before
Less than before
Same as before
Not at all
To a small extent
To a medium
extent
To a large extent
▪ Roughly half of the
respondents said that
their water consumption
is now more than before
Covid-19 and about 5%
said it was less than
before.
▪ About 60% strongly
associated the change in
water consumption to the
Covid-19 pandemic.

26. Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Female Male Female Male
Do you pay for drinking
water?
How is the cost of water now
compared to before Covid19?
Proportionofhouseholds
No
Yes
More than
before
Less than
before
same as before
▪ Only about one
quarter of the
respondents who said
that they pay for
drinking.
▪ Out of them, about half
of the men and quarter
of the women said that
the cost of drinking
water has gone up
since the pandemic

27. Household Water Insecurity Experience Scale (HWISE) – in the past
2 weeks
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male
Worried you would not have
enough water
Changed plans due to water
problems
There was no enough drinking
water
Went without washing hands due
to water problems
Proportionofhouseholds
Never (0 times) Rarely (1 times) Sometimes (2-5 times) Often (6-10 times) Always (>10 times)
▪ Water insecurity seems not a major issue with over 80% of the respondents
indicating never have been worried about or not to have water shortage.
▪ A similar proportion indicated to not have changed plans/schedules due to
water problems

28. School and learning programmes disruption
▪ 71% and 65% of the households
had boys and girls,
correspondingly, who were of
school going age.
▪ Among them, they had on
average 2 boys and/or 2 girls of
this age bracket.
▪ Roughly three quarters of both
boys and girls were not going to
school.
▪ The main reason given by almost
all (99%) for school absenteeism
was schools closure, definitely
because of the pandemic.
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
School going
aged boys
Boys not in
school last two
weeks
School going
aged girls
Girls not in
school last two
weeks
Numberofpupils/students

29. Household conflict – Disagreement and conflict resolution
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Female
respondent
Male Respondent Female
respondent
Male Respondent
Had a disagreement or fought in the
last two weeks
Easily worked out everyday spousal
problems together
Proportionofhouseholds
Disagreement and conflict resolution
Not at all Rarely Sometimes Often Refused
▪ This section was asked only
those who had spouses/partners,
had their speaker phone off and
were in private space.
▪ Well over half of them indicated
that they did not have spousal
disagreements and/or fights in
the two weeks preceding the
survey.
▪ That not withstanding, conflicts
are substantially witnessed with
more than a quarter indicating
that they sometimes or often had
disagreements and/or fights in
the same period.
▪ More women than men indicated
that they easily resolved their
spousal problems together.

30. Household conflict
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Female
respondent
Male respondent Female
respondent
Male respondent
Been afriad of spouse in the last
two weeks
Been afraid of other family
member in the last two weeks
Proportionofhouseholds
Been afraid of spouse or another family
member
Not at all Rarely Sometimes Often Refused
▪ Although the numbers of
respondents who reported
being afraid of their spouses
was low, its noteworthy that
substantially more women
than men were afraid of their
spouses.
▪ The same was true of being
afraid of another member of
the household

31. Conclusions
▪ As Kenya evidently gets into a second wave of Covid-19 infections, the
pandemic and the resulting restrictions continues to disrupt life among the
rural smallholder households:
oThere has been loss of income,
oMobility has been hampered,
oEngagement in productive work has been reduced,
oAccess to food has been affected,
oSchool programmes have been disrupted.
▪ Households are coping by:
oSpending savings, borrowing, selling family assets and engaging in
alternative jobs,
oConsuming different kind of foods, getting food from different sources,
consuming less,