Category 1: Website analysis



It is impressive to see that all eight government
institutions surveyed have websites which contain
useful information such as their policies, areas of
expertise, regulations, and news.
Not all the information provided is up-to-date.
It was interesting to find language diversity:
- BOT, TIC and TIRA use two languages, namely
Swahili and English.
- TCU, NHIF and TFS mix English and Swahili on
their websites.
- TANAPA’s website is exceptionally multilingual,
displaying its information in more than 57
national languages.
BOT updates some of the information on their
website every day.
TANAPA, TIRA and PCCB had current information
on their websites.
Most sites look old fashioned and boring.
On some websites, e.g. TCU and BOT, the ‘Contact
Us’ feature was faulty, therefore there is no
guarantee that a request sent via the website will
reach the targeted institution. The fact that not
one institution acknowledged receipt of the emails
sent to them via their respective websites is a clear
indicator of a defective contact mechanism.


There appears to be challenges with some tasked
with the handling of information requests. The
researcher had to resubmit emails and letters
because the staff at various institutions was unable
to locate the letters/emails.

Category 2: Requests for information



Letters were hand-delivered and emailed to the
respective organisations.
Only two organisations, NHIF and TANAPA,
acknowledged receipt of the letters.
Even after three follow up attempts with other
institutions, some still did not respond.
Only five organisations responded.
BOT, TIC and TANAPA did not provide the required
Different reasons were given as to why information
was not shared:
- TIC claimed that the person assigned the job
was at a funeral.
- TANAPA failed to respond because they were
unable to locate the person who received the
letter. A second letter was sent and additional
follow-up attempts made without resulting in
the receipt of information.
Some public officials found it questionable that a
citizen would request information for personal use
and knowledge, and did not take our information
requests seriously.
Staff at other institutions remained friendly and
seemingly cooperative; yet assistance was only
forthcoming upon repeated and consistent followups.


Select target paragraph3