An anti- corruption survey has revealed that Nakuru residents seeking services at the county offices are more likely to face bribe demands.

This is according to a survey conducted by the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission which indicated that 65.5 percent of service seekers in Nakuru reported paying bribe to get the services.

The report by the National Ethics and Corruption Survey (NECS) 2024, placed Nakuru in Kenya’s “middle tier” of bribery prevalence, ranking it at 29th position on overall: not among the worst-performing counties, yet far from being a model of clean governance.

On the question of how likely a resident is to be asked for a bribe during a service encounter, Nakuru’s score is 0.72, substantially lower than several counties that scored above 1.0.

This suggests that bribery solicitation in Nakuru is less frequent per service encounter than in many parts of the country.

In simple terms, a person seeking services in Nakuru may not be as frequently targeted for bribe solicitation as those in the highest-risk counties.

Despite the lower solicitation likelihood, actual bribe payment in Nakuru remains very common. The data shows that 65.5 percent of service seekers in the county ended up paying a bribe.

This puts Nakuru behind counties with extreme prevalence levels—some posted 100 percent prevalence—but still places it in a troubling national position:

More than six in ten Nakuru residents seeking a public service paid a bribe during the period surveyed.
This apparent contradiction—low likelihood but high prevalence—points to two possible interpretations.

Bribery may be concentrated in a few key, high-contact services (such as land offices, permit issuance, employment processes), meaning that while not everyone is asked, those seeking certain services are almost guaranteed to face a bribe situation.

The act of paying may be normalized in Nakuru, making residents more likely to comply quickly with bribery requests when they occur.

The report also measures whether paying a bribe actually improved a citizen’s chance of obtaining a service.

Nakuru posts an impact index of 0.68—significantly lower than counties where bribes dramatically altered outcomes (with scores above 1.0).

In Nakuru, bribes do help, but they do not drastically change the likelihood of receiving a service compared to counties where bribe payment is almost the gateway to access.

This places Nakuru in a middle position where bribery is common but not always decisive.

Perhaps the strongest indicator of Nakuru’s national significance is its 2.41 percent share of all bribes recorded countrywide.

This does not place Nakuru among the top bribery-heavy counties, but it does make it a notable contributor, especially considering its population size and regional economic influence.

If the national bribery landscape were a pie, Nakuru holds a slice large enough to demand policy attention.
According to the report, public education and awareness creation, employment creation, user-friendly corruption reporting channels, partnerships, and coalition of stakeholders in the fight against corruption are some of the most effective anti-corruption measures.

EACC Report: 65 percent of Nakuru residents paid bribes to get services at the county offices

Author Spotlight

Bret Sanya