The Public Investments Committee on Commercial Affairs and Energy has raised concern over the audit queries relating to issuance of multiple imprests to staff at the Kenya Water Institute without evidence of surrender for the same.

This emerged when the institute’s management appeared before the Committee chaired by Pokot South MP Hon. David Pkosing for review of queries raised by the Office of Auditor General between FY 2019/2020 and 2024/2025.

The Committee noted that a review of the Institute’s financial books revealed that several officers had been issued with cumulative imprests amounting to Kshs. 10.5 million which had not been surrendered at the end of the financial year.

Hon. Pkosing noted that this was contrary to Regulation 93 (8) of the Public Finance Management Regulations, 2015.

“That regulation requires that in order to effectively and efficiently manage and control the issue of temporary imprest, an accounting officer or AIE holder shall ensure that no second imprest is issued to any officer before the first is surrendered or recovered in full of the officer’s salary,” noted Hon. Pkosing.

The institution management led by the Chief Executive Officer Mr. Leilo Letangule acknowledged the said audit query indicating that and that corrective actions had since been instituted to recover the imprest.

“The officers concerned were formally notified to surrender or account for the outstanding imprest amounting to Kshs, 10.5 million,” noted Mr. Letangule.

He added that the institute had since reinforced adherence to imprest regulations by ensuring that imprest policy is strictly used to prevent issuance of additional imprest to officers.

The issue of unsurrendered imprest and consequent deduction of the same from the from officers’ salaries had led to six officers receiving a net pay that was less than a a third of their corresponding basic pay of Kshs. 86, 323.

“The Institute issued letters to all affected staff directing them to regularize their net pay in accordance with the statutory one-third rule,” said Mr. Letangule.

Also noted as an audit query was the fact that the institute had not implemented a Debt Collection Policy, and therefore there were no guidelines on how the recovery of debts should be done.

In the circumstances, the guidelines on debt collection and action to be taken in case of non-recovery of debt could be confirmed.

The management indicated that there was in place a receivables management process to guide on debt collection.