All documents
Capacity assessment

GBV Response Capacity in Kisumu Level 4 Facilities

A facility-level assessment of post-rape care, PEP, mental health and survivor accompaniment capacity at seven flagship Level 4 facilities in Kisumu County, with a per-facility scorecard and eight recommendations.

Published July 2025Afya Rights InitiativeKisumu, KenyaARI-CA-2025-02v1.132 min readCC BY-NC 4.0
Foreword

This assessment exists because of a series of phone calls. Between October 2024 and May 2025, ARI's rapid-response line received forty-one calls from survivors, family members or community health promoters reporting that a survivor had reached a Kisumu Level 4 facility within the 72-hour PEP window, and had not been able to start PEP that night. In thirty-one of those calls, the named obstacle was the same: a stocked-out post-rape care kit.

We treated each call as an emergency and routed survivors to partner facilities. We also did the slower work this report documents: a structured assessment of capacity at seven flagship Level 4 facilities, mapped against the Ministry of Health's National Guidelines on Management of Sexual Violence and the WHO clinical guidelines.

The findings are not a verdict on the facility teams we worked with. Across the assessment, individual clinicians, nurses, counsellors and gender desk officers performed beyond what their resourcing reasonably allowed. The findings are about a system configuration that has put the burden of survivor-centred care on the people closest to survivors, and the cost of that configuration on the people who need care most.

- The Afya Rights Initiative team

Section 1

Executive summary

7
Level 4 facilities assessed across all seven Kisumu sub-counties
12
Capacity indicators per facility, drawn from MoH and WHO standards
16 days
Longest single recorded post-rape care kit stockout during the period
4 / 7
Facilities where PEP can be reliably initiated outside working hours

The eight recommendations in Section 12 sit alongside ARI's County SRHR Financing Brief[1] and propose a set of changes that can be implemented within one budget cycle, at a county-wide cost in the order of KES 12–16 million per year.

Section 2

Why this assessment, and why now

Kisumu sits in a region with documented high prevalence of sexual and gender-based violence. KDHS 2022's domestic violence module places lifetime exposure to physical or sexual violence among women aged 15–49 in Nyanza region above the national average[2]. The county has been a long-time recipient of donor-supported GBV programming, including PEPFAR DREAMS[3] and a series of UN-led OSC interventions tracing back to the early 2000s[4].

Despite that history, ARI's casework continues to surface predictable, structural failures at the moment of contact. The purpose of this assessment is not to argue that capacity is uniformly low, it is not, but to make the variation legible enough to be acted on at a budget line level.

Section 3

The standard we measured against

The assessment rubric synthesises the Ministry of Health's National Guidelines on Management of Sexual Violence[5] and PRC1 SOPs[6], the WHO clinical guidelines[7], the WHO management guidance for health systems[8], and the UNFPA/WHO Essential Services Package[9]. The rubric (Annex A) covers twelve indicators across six domains: identification, clinical care, forensic documentation, psychosocial care, referral, and data.

Section 4

Method overview

Section 5

Per-facility scorecard

The scorecard below summarises performance against the 12-indicator rubric. Indicators and scoring are detailed in Annex A. Facility identifiers follow the Kenya Master Health Facility List[10].

Table 1. Capacity scorecard, seven flagship Level 4 facilities, 2024–2025
Sub-countyFacilityIdentificationClinicalForensicPsychosocialReferralDataTotal / 12
Kisumu CentralJOOTRH2/22/22/21.5/22/21.5/211/12
Kisumu EastLumumba SCH2/21.5/21.5/21/21.5/21/28.5/12
Kisumu WestChulaimbo CRH2/22/21.5/21.5/22/21.5/210.5/12
NyandoAhero County Hospital1.5/21.5/21/21/21.5/21/27.5/12
NyakachPap-Onditi SCH1/21/20.5/20.5/21/20.5/24.5/12
MuhoroniMuhoroni SCH1.5/21.5/21/20.5/21/20.5/26/12
SemeKombewa CRH2/21.5/21.5/21/21.5/21/28.5/12
Source: ARI assessment, October 2024 – May 2025. Scores out of 12. See Annex A for the full rubric.
Figure 1. Total capacity score by facility (lower is more constrained)
JOOTRH (Kisumu Central)11 / 12
Chulaimbo CRH (Kisumu West)10.5 / 12
Lumumba SCH (Kisumu East)8.5 / 12
Kombewa CRH (Seme)8.5 / 12
Ahero County Hospital (Nyando)7.5 / 12
Muhoroni SCH (Muhoroni)6 / 12
Pap-Onditi SCH (Nyakach)4.5 / 12
Source: ARI assessment, 2024–2025.
Section 6

The survivor pathway, in numbers

The cascade below traces what happens, in aggregate, to one hundred survivors of recent sexual violence who reach a Kisumu Level 4 facility within 72 hours of the incident. Numbers are ARI estimates synthesised from facility logs and KIIs.

Figure 2. Survivor pathway through Kisumu Level 4 facilities (per 100 in-window presentations)
1. Survivors who reach a Level 4 within 72 hours100
2. Survivors with PRC1 form opened and basic clinical care92(92% of start)
3. Survivors initiated on PEP76(76% of start)
PEP initiation drops sharply outside working hours and on weekends.
4. Survivors offered psychosocial first aid by a trained provider48(48% of start)
The single largest gap in the pathway.
5. Survivors with documented day-14 PEP follow-up33(33% of start)
Adherence support is the predictor of effectiveness.
6. Survivors with documented day-90 follow-up21(21% of start)
Source: ARI synthesis from facility records and KIIs, 2024–2025. Indicative.

The cliff-edge between psychosocial first aid (48) and day-14 PEP follow-up (33) is the single most consequential drop-off in the pathway. International evidence on PEP adherence shows that completion rates fall sharply where psychosocial support is not integrated into the visit[11]. The clinical and psychosocial pathways are not parallel, they are causal.

Section 7

Three nights, three pathways

The three composite case studies below are constructed from patterns observed during the assessment. Each is anonymised and the identifying details have been changed.

Case study

Wendy, 19

Kondele ward
January 2025, 22:40
Situation
Wendy presented at a Kisumu East Level 4 facility 4 hours after a sexual assault. The night-shift clinical officer opened a PRC1, conducted basic clinical care, and located one partial post-rape care kit.
ARI response
ARI's rapid-response volunteer accompanied Wendy to JOOTRH, where PEP was initiated at 01:15, well within the 72-hour window. Forensic samples were appropriately preserved.
Outcome
Wendy completed the 28-day PEP course with weekly check-ins from an ARI peer counsellor. She has resumed her HND studies. Day-90 HIV test was negative.

Composite case study, anonymised. Names, ages and identifying details have been changed to protect the individuals concerned.

Case study

Atieno, 14

South West Nyakach ward
February 2025, 19:10
Situation
Atieno, a Form 1 student, was brought to a sub-county facility by an aunt. The on-call clinical officer had no GBV-specific training. The facility had no paediatric-sized PEP regimen on the shelf and no trained child-survivor counsellor.
ARI response
The clinical officer rang the gender desk officer at Chulaimbo CRH, who advised on initial management. ARI arranged transport at 21:30. PEP was initiated at Chulaimbo at 23:50, at hour 28 of the incident.
Outcome
Atieno completed PEP and a 12-session child-survivor counselling pathway with a partner organisation. The legal process is ongoing. Her school re-entry was supported by a joint ARI/school visit.

Composite case study, anonymised. Names, ages and identifying details have been changed to protect the individuals concerned.

Case study

Faith, 28

Muhoroni ward
April 2025, 04:20
Situation
Faith presented at a Muhoroni Level 4 facility immediately after an intimate partner assault. The facility opened a PRC1 and provided basic clinical care, but no trained psychosocial first aid was available, and no security or safe-shelter referral was offered.
ARI response
The clinician completed clinical care and signposted Faith to a community paralegal contact. ARI's rapid-response volunteer was contacted at 09:40 and provided psychosocial first aid, safety planning and referral to a partner shelter.
Outcome
Faith was supported into a 30-day shelter stay. PEP and forensic documentation were completed. The case is currently with the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

Composite case study, anonymised. Names, ages and identifying details have been changed to protect the individuals concerned.

Section 8

Post-rape care kit stockouts

Stockouts of post-rape care kits are the single most cited obstacle in our casework, and the assessment confirmed the pattern at a county-wide level.

Table 2. Post-rape care kit stockouts, by facility, October 2024 – May 2025
FacilityStockout episodesTotal stockout daysLongest single episode
JOOTRH00-
Chulaimbo CRH133 days
Lumumba SCH3115 days
Kombewa CRH274 days
Ahero County Hospital4198 days
Muhoroni SCH5279 days
Pap-Onditi SCH43116 days
Source: ARI review of facility pharmacy stock cards and PRC1 logs.

You order on time. You follow the procurement memo. The kit is not at the depot when you go. By the time it arrives, you are three weeks behind. You ration. You don't tell anybody. Until somebody you can't help walks in at midnight.

Pharmacy technologist, Level 4 facility, Nyakach
Section 9

The mental health gap

Mental health is the most consistently under-resourced dimension across the assessment. Only one of seven facilities had a dedicated mental health professional (psychiatric clinical officer or counsellor) integrated into the survivor pathway. The others rely on referral, when they refer at all[12].

Figure 3. Survivors offered psychosocial first aid by a trained provider at the index visit, by facility
JOOTRH≈78%
Chulaimbo CRH≈64%
Kombewa CRH≈52%
Lumumba SCH≈48%
Ahero County Hospital≈36%
Muhoroni SCH≈28%
Pap-Onditi SCH≈18%
Source: ARI assessment, 2024–2025. Indicative.
Section 10

Child survivors require a different system

Child survivors of sexual violence have specific clinical, psychosocial and protection needs[13]. The assessment found that none of the seven facilities had a fully child-friendly survivor pathway in operation. Three had elements (paediatric PEP regimens stocked, child-friendly examination rooms); the others relied on the standard adult pathway with ad-hoc adaptation.

Childline Kenya's 2024 statistics[14] document continued high reporting of child sexual abuse in the wider region. The current configuration places the burden on individual clinicians who, at 22:00 on a weeknight, are asked to be paediatricians, counsellors, and child protection officers simultaneously. This is not a sustainable design.

Section 11

The cost of inaction

The Office of the Auditor-General's 2023 performance audit on services to survivors of sexual violence flagged similar issues at national level[15]. Comparative economic literature on the costs of unaddressed gender-based violence places the lifetime per-case economic cost at multiples of the per-case prevention cost[16]. In Kisumu's terms, the indicative arithmetic is direct:

Section 12

Eight recommendations

Table 3. Eight recommendations for the FY 2025/26 cycle
#RecommendationOwner
1Establish a 24/7 PRC kit buffer at every Level 4 facility, with stock-out reporting in DHIS2Department of Health
2Designate and train a dedicated gender desk officer per facility (FTE)Department of Health, HR
3Integrate psychosocial first aid into the survivor index visit at every facilityDepartment of Health, MH lead
4Adopt a standardised child survivor pathway, with paediatric PEP stocked at every Level 4Department of Health, Pharmacy
5Fund a county-wide survivor accompaniment transport line (after-hours)County Treasury, DoH
6Publish a quarterly per-facility GBV scorecard (extension of ARI rubric)Health Committee, DoH
7Build a costed referral compact with shelters, paralegals, and the ODPPDoH, Gender directorate, ODPP liaison
8Co-decision forum including survivors and frontline clinicians for budget designHealth Committee
Source: ARI.
Annex A

The capacity rubric (12 indicators, 6 domains)

Table 4. ARI capacity rubric for Level 4 GBV response, full indicator set
Domain#IndicatorScoring (0 / 0.5 / 1)
Identification1Posted signage indicating GBV services availabilityAbsent / partial / present and visible
Identification2Trained gender desk officer or designated focal person on rosterNone / rotating untrained / dedicated and trained
Clinical3PEP available within 72 hours of presentationNo / day only / 24/7
Clinical4Emergency contraception available at presentationNo / sometimes / always
Forensic5PRC1 form completed for every GBV presentation<50% / 50–80% / >80%
Forensic6Forensic samples appropriately collected and preservedRarely / sometimes / consistently
Psychosocial7Psychosocial first aid offered at index visit by trained providerRarely / sometimes / consistently
Psychosocial8Documented day-14 follow-up<25% / 25–50% / >50%
Referral9Documented referral pathway to shelter, paralegal and ODPPNone / informal / formal compact
Referral10Survivor accompaniment available after hoursNone / on goodwill / funded line
Data11PRC1 logs reconciled monthly with DHIS2Rarely / quarterly / monthly
Data12Stock-card monitoring of PRC kits with reporting lineNone / informal / formal reporting
Source: ARI, drawing on MoH Sexual Violence Guidelines 4th ed., WHO Clinical Guidelines (2013), and the UNFPA/WHO Essential Services Package.
Annex B

Survey instruments and interview guides (summary)

The full instruments are available on request. They include:

  • Facility scorecard checklist (12 indicators, 0–1 scoring with notes).
  • Key informant interview guide for facility in-charge and gender desk officer (45–60 minutes, semi-structured).
  • Pharmacy stock card review template (8 months of PRC kit issuances).
  • Mystery-client style exit review protocol (used with consent at 12 visits).
  • Pathway tracing template, used to reconstruct the cascade in Section 6.

All instruments were reviewed by an external advisor on survivor-centred research design before deployment.

Reference

Glossary

ART
Antiretroviral Therapy, long-term HIV treatment regimen.
CRH
County Referral Hospital.
DHIS2
District Health Information System 2, Kenya's routine health information platform.
EC
Emergency Contraception.
FTE
Full-time equivalent, staffing measure equivalent to one full-time post.
GBV
Gender-Based Violence.
JOOTRH
Jaramogi Oginga Odinga Teaching and Referral Hospital, Kisumu.
KII
Key Informant Interview.
ODPP
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
OSC
One-Stop Centre, integrated GBV survivor service location.
PEP
Post-Exposure Prophylaxis, antiretroviral medication started within 72 hours of HIV exposure.
PRC1
Post-Rape Care Form 1, Kenya's standardised survivor clinical and forensic form.
PRC kit
Standardised commodities pack supporting clinical and forensic care after sexual violence.
Psychosocial first aid
Immediate, supportive, non-clinical response to a survivor at the index visit.
SCH
Sub-County Hospital.
Acknowledgements

ARI thanks every facility in-charge, gender desk officer, clinical officer, nurse, counsellor, pharmacy technologist, community health promoter, and survivor advocate who participated in interviews and document reviews. We thank our partner organisations who provided cover at facilities during ARI staff visits. We thank the survivors who consented to have their cases, anonymised, composite, inform this work. The responsibility for any errors is ours alone.

References

Bibliography

  1. [1]Afya Rights Initiative (2025). County SRHR Financing Brief 2025 (ARI-PB-2025-03). Kisumu.
  2. [2]Kenya National Bureau of Statistics et al. (2023). Kenya Demographic and Health Survey 2022, Domestic Violence Module. KNBS and ICF.
  3. [3]PEPFAR (2023). DREAMS Implementation Brief, Kenya. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of State.
  4. [4]Kilonzo, N., Theobald, S., Nyamato, E., et al. (2009). Delivering post-rape care services: Kenya's experience in developing integrated services. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 87(7), 555–559.
  5. [5]Ministry of Health, Kenya (2014, revised 2023). National Guidelines on Management of Sexual Violence in Kenya, 4th edition. Nairobi: MoH.
  6. [6]Ministry of Health, Kenya (2022). Post-Rape Care Form (PRC1) and Standard Operating Procedures. Nairobi: MoH.
  7. [7]World Health Organization (2013). Responding to intimate partner violence and sexual violence against women: WHO clinical and policy guidelines. Geneva: WHO.
  8. [8]World Health Organization (2017). Strengthening health systems to respond to women subjected to intimate partner violence or sexual violence: a manual for health managers. Geneva: WHO.
  9. [9]UNFPA & WHO (2019). Essential Services Package for Women and Girls Subject to Violence. New York: UNFPA.
  10. [10]Ministry of Health, Kenya (2024). Kenya Master Health Facility List. Nairobi: MoH Health Information System.
  11. [11]Ford, N., Mayer, K. H., et al. (2014). Adherence to HIV postexposure prophylaxis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. AIDS, 28(18), 2721–2727.
  12. [12]World Health Organization (2022). World Mental Health Report: Transforming mental health for all. Geneva: WHO.
  13. [13]World Health Organization (2017). Responding to children and adolescents who have been sexually abused: WHO clinical guidelines. Geneva: WHO.
  14. [14]Childline Kenya (2024). Annual Statistics Report. Nairobi: Child Welfare Society of Kenya.
  15. [15]Office of the Auditor-General, Kenya (2023). Performance Audit on the Provision of Services to Survivors of Sexual Violence. Nairobi.
  16. [16]Hoeffler, A., & Fearon, J. (2014). Conflict and Violence Assessment Paper: Benefits and Costs of the Conflict and Violence Targets. Copenhagen Consensus Center.
  17. [17]Ministry of Public Service, Gender, Senior Citizens Affairs and Special Programmes (2024). National Policy for the Prevention and Response to Gender-Based Violence (revised). Nairobi.
  18. [18]County Government of Kisumu (2023). Kisumu County Integrated Development Plan III, 2023–2027.
About Afya Rights Initiative

Afya Rights Initiative (ARI) is a youth-led community organisation based in Kisumu, Kenya, working at the intersection of sexual and reproductive health rights, gender-based violence response, and adolescent education. We accompany girls, young women and key populations across Kisumu County and push for county-level policy and budget changes that make their rights real.

Contact
hello@afyarightsinitiative.or.ke
+254 717 558 070
Kisumu, Kenya
Document
ARI-CA-2025-02
v1.1
July 2025
Registration
Community-based organisation registration with the State Department for Social Protection, Kenya.
License
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)
Suggested citation

Afya Rights Initiative (2025). GBV Response Capacity in Kisumu Level 4 Facilities. Kisumu, Kenya. ARI-CA-2025-02. Released under CC BY-NC 4.0.