Funding cuts are shrinking NGO teams across Kenya. The resulting pressure on in-house M&E capacity is changing how organizations plan, collect and use field data.
A sector under pressure
Kenya's development and humanitarian sector is going through one of its most disruptive periods in decades. Since the United States government moved to freeze and later dismantle USAID funding in early 2025, NGOs across the country have been forced to cut budgets, shrink teams and, in many cases, close programs entirely. For an ecosystem long anchored by donor funding, the effects are still unfolding and reshaping how organizations approach fieldwork, monitoring and evaluation in Kenya.
Reports from Kenyan health officials and county governments point to tens of thousands of jobs affected in the immediate aftermath of the funding freeze. Health workers, community health promoters and program staff were among the hardest hit. Clinics that relied on USAID-backed programs closed, contracts worth billions of shillings were terminated, and organizations built around long-term donor commitments had to restructure quickly.
Globally, hundreds of NGOs have responded by closing offices, laying off staff or consolidating operations around core mission areas. Kenya's health sector has borne much of the impact, but the effects extend to environmental conservation, education and livelihoods programming. These sectors depend on consistent, well-resourced monitoring and evaluation systems to demonstrate results to remaining donors.
The hidden casualty: in-house data collection capacity
One less-discussed consequence of downsizing is the loss of an organization's ability to collect reliable field data. M&E teams are often among the first departments trimmed when budgets tighten because their work, while essential for accountability and future funding, can seem less urgent than direct service delivery in the short term.
This is precisely the wrong moment to weaken data collection capacity. As NGOs compete for a smaller pool of donor funds, organizations that can demonstrate measurable, well-documented results are better positioned to secure support. Without robust field data, it becomes harder to prove program outcomes, win new grants or make the case for continued backing from partners such as the Global Fund, private foundations and bilateral donors from Europe and Asia.
The result is a difficult paradox: data-driven evidence matters more than ever, while many organizations have less internal capacity to collect it.
Field data collection challenges in Kenya
Even before the funding cuts, collecting reliable field data in Kenya involved persistent operational challenges. A reduced team has fewer people, vehicles and supervisory resources available to manage them.
- Geographic diversity and access. Reaching respondents across urban informal settlements and remote counties such as Turkana, Marsabit or Mandera requires careful logistical planning.
- Connectivity gaps. Inconsistent mobile coverage in rural areas can delay data uploads and quality checks, even when digital collection tools are used.
- Enumerator training and turnover. Cutting training budgets can leave field teams less prepared to use the tools and work sensitively within local communities.
- Data verification and fraud prevention. Surveys remain vulnerable to fabricated entries and shortcuts when supervision structures are stretched thin.
- Timely reporting. Donors and government partners increasingly expect near real-time dashboards and analysis from much smaller internal teams.
- Cost pressure. Organizations need accurate, efficient data collection without the fixed cost of maintaining a large permanent research department.
Adapting to a leaner reality
Many organizations are reconsidering how they manage data collection. Instead of maintaining large in-house M&E departments, NGOs, research institutions and private-sector clients can engage specialist field partners for a specific survey, baseline study or impact evaluation, then scale the team down when the assignment ends.
This model can provide access to trained enumerators, established logistics networks and quality assurance systems without the overhead of a permanent department. For organizations that have lost internal data teams, outsourcing may reduce costs while protecting quality, provided the partner has credible supervision, verification and data-protection practices.
Sonivance supports NGOs, researchers and businesses across Kenya with household surveys, market research, program monitoring and evaluation studies. Its field teams use mobile data collection systems designed for Kenya's geographic and connectivity realities. For organizations navigating tighter budgets, using established field infrastructure can be more practical than rebuilding an internal team from scratch.
Looking ahead
The funding landscape for Kenya's NGO sector is unlikely to return to its pre-2025 shape soon. Organizations that navigate this period successfully will need to diversify funding, focus closely on core programs and find leaner ways to gather the evidence that donors and governments require.
Field data collection now sits at the centre of that adaptation. It is not simply a compliance requirement in a grant proposal. It is the evidence base that influences which organizations receive funding next. For NGOs rebuilding after layoffs and program closures, investing in reliable, cost-efficient field data collection, whether through an internal team or a trusted external partner, is a strategic decision.
As Kenya's development sector resets, organizations that treat data collection as a priority will be better equipped to demonstrate results, attract funding and continue serving the communities that depend on them.