Institute for Development Studies, University of Nairobi

This paper follows an earlier I.D.S.Working Paper (5) which made an evaluation of the PIM system of procedures developed by Belshaw and Chambers and currently being used in the Special Rural Development Programme in Kenya. Following the SEDP half year seminar at Diani (EPD 237/015 (l)) we anticipated that some changes had taken place in the PIM system since our previous research conducted towards the end of September 1972, We have now widened our sample to include officers concerned with the SPJ3P at the divisional, district, provincial and national levels. In doing this we hoped to; i) review our previous findings, modifying or discarding them where necessary; and ii) identify and evaluate any changes that might have occurred -in the PIM systeme Once in the field we found that the only notable change in the system was a proposal to replace monthly management meetings and monthly management reports (MMMs and MMBs, respectively) with quarterly ones. In seme areas this innovation had not been instituted while in others the innovations had been in operation for about four month. Therefore, many of our comments concerning these innovations will be more anticipatory than empirical. Only time will tell. The PIM system is judged against the functions which it was intended or could have been expected to fulfil and is found to be generally successful. Various ways in which the system is not working well are noted and recommendations are made for overcoming these difficulties. The types of situations in which the PIM procedures are probably useful and the kinds of officers who are most likely to be successful in applying them are analysed. Within the limitations mentioned and with the reforms suggested, the PIM system is found to be a valuable tool for improving Government performance and is recommended for wider use.