PART 1:BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION

1.1 General Introduction and Justification

Kenya's clean cooking transition is entering a decisive phase. The Kenya National Cooking Transition Strategy (KNCTS 2024–2028) and the Kenya National eCooking Strategy (KNeCS 2024) commit the country to universal access to clean cooking by 2028 through a multi-fuel pathway spanning LPG, bioethanol, biogas, sustainable biomass, and electric cooking. The KNCTS sets specific fuel-mix targets for 2028: LPG 50%, bioethanol 30%, electric cooking 10%, and biogas/sustainable biomass 10–13% of the national cooking-fuel mix, with the separate Bioenergy Strategy Action Plan 2024 projecting bioethanol’s own share of the cooking mix to rise from 2% (2019 baseline) to 22% by 2028, with an intermediate milestone of 20.2% by 2026. These targets are the reason local manufacturing capacity across all four fuel streams matters equally to this manual, rather than any single fuel stream. Nationally, roughly 68.5% of Kenyan households, about 9.1 million still rely primarily on traditional fuels such as firewood and charcoal, a dependence that drives deforestation, indoor air pollution linked to tens of thousands of premature deaths annually, and a heavy time and income burden on women and children.

Delivering on the national ambition depends on a strong domestic manufacturing base capable of producing affordable, durable, and standards-compliant fuels and appliances at scale. Local manufacturers the enterprises that pelletise agricultural residue, install biogas digesters, ferment and bottle bioethanol, and assemble electric cooking appliances are the supply-side engine of the transition. This manual exists to build their capacity, systematically and practically, so that this potential converts into safe, compliant, marketable products.

This manual is grounded in verifiable, primary evidence: a structured Key Informant Interview (KII) round with ten manufacturing enterprises across five counties, and a 116-enterprise Baseline Survey Report covering Nairobi, Nakuru, Kisumu, Kajiado, and Kilifi. Wherever a statistic appears, it is used to explain why a topic matters inside the Session Overview of the relevant session rather than presented as the lesson itself.

Four gaps recur across both the KII and the baseline survey and directly shaped what this manual teaches in depth:

•    Quality assurance and standards uptake are inconsistent- nationally, 65.2% of surveyed firms report some quality control, but 29.6% have none at all, and only 38.9% hold any certification.

•    Business systems and finance remain informal- 45.5% of firms are unregistered, and 65.8% report no access to formal credit.

•    Supply-chain and feedstock variability undermines product performance, even though 88.6% of firms source inputs domestically.

•    Technical and business skills gaps are specific and named by manufacturers themselves, not assumed by trainers. see section 1.3 below.

1.2 Programme Background

Local manufacturers sit at the centre of Kenya's clean cooking transition. They produce pellets and briquettes from agricultural and forestry residues, build and install biogas digesters, blend and package bioethanol fuel, and assemble or distribute electric cooking appliances. Yet many of these manufacturers particularly small, and youth- or women-led enterprises operate with limited access to structured technical training, unclear pathways through KEBS and NEMA compliance processes, and weak business management systems that constrain their growth and their ability to meet buyer and consumer quality expectations.

This manual’s scope is deliberately wider than the ELMECC Energy Crops and Bioenergy Enterprise Development manual, which trains farmers and out-growers supplying energy-crop feedstock for biomass and bioethanol production. Only two of the four fuel streams covered here (biomass pellets/briquettes and bioethanol) draw on that energy-crop supply chain; biogas manufacturing relies on livestock and organic-waste feedstock, and electric cooking relies on component sourcing and assembly, neither of which is covered by the Energy Crops manual. Where a participant’s enterprise sits on the energy-crop feedstock side of the value chain, the two manuals are complementary and should be used together; where it does not (biogas, electric cooking, or bioethanol sourced from purchased industrial ethanol rather than crops), this manual stands alone.

Development basis: a structured review of existing CCAK and sector training materials and the Clean Cooking Standards Quick Guide; a Key Informant Interview round with ten manufacturers across Nairobi, Nakuru, Kisumu, Kajiado, and Kilifi conducted through Kobo Toolbox; the GAMOS East Africa Baseline Survey Report (116 enterprises, 73% response rate against a verified frame of 158); and the GEDSI and Participatory Market Systems Development (PMSD) approaches applied consistently across ELMECC training products.

1.3 Defining the Target Audience: Stakeholder Analysis

A training manual is only as effective as its fit to the people it is written for. Before structuring the curriculum, the development process mapped exactly who the manufacturers are, at what scale they operate, and what they themselves say they need  rather than assuming a generic MSME profile.

Enterprises consulted through Key Informant Interviews

Fourteen manufacturing enterprises across five counties were interviewed in depth to ground this manual in real operating conditions:

Aggregate profile of the manufacturers consulted

Across the fourteen KII respondents, the profile that emerges is instructive for trainers: this is a sector run predominantly by women, in their forties, operating small and micro enterprises that have already survived several years in business meaning this manual should be delivered as peer-level enterprise refinement, not first-time instruction.

 

The wider manufacturing population this manual serves

The fourteen KII enterprises sit within a much larger population. The ELMECC/GAMOS East Africa Baseline Survey Report surveyed 116 active manufacturing and assembly enterprises across the same five counties, giving the manual's designers a statistically grounded picture of the sector it is training.

1.4 How to Use This Manual

Participants should identify their primary fuel stream(s) before training begins and focus on the corresponding sessions in Part 3 (Technological Aspects) and the fuel-specific compliance pathways in Part 5, while all participants complete Parts 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 in full regardless of fuel stream, since business skills, safeguards, GEDSI, practical facilitation tools, and post-training follow-up apply across every manufacturing pathway.

•    If you manufacture biomass pellets or briquettes: prioritise sessions 3.1, 4 (costing worked example), 5.2, and 6.4.1.

•    If you install or fabricate biogas systems: prioritise sessions 3.2, 5.3, and 6.4.2.

•    If you produce or bottle bioethanol: prioritise sessions 3.3, 5.4, and 6.4.3, and pay particular attention to the safety notes on flammable-liquid handling.

•    If you assemble or distribute electric cooking appliances, including non-hybrid appliances such as electric rice cookers and ugali makers: prioritise sessions 3.4, 5.5, and 6.4.4.

 

PART 2:TRAINING MANUAL OUTLINE

2.1 Manual Structuring: Developing the DACUM Chart

DACUM (Developing A Curriculum) is an occupational-analysis method in which the duties and tasks that make up a job are identified directly by expert workers, then verified against real performance data, rather than assumed by curriculum designers sitting outside the sector. For this manual, the DACUM process combined the ten manufacturer Key Informant Interviews with the 116-firm baseline survey to produce a duty task chart that reflects what manufacturers actually do, what goes wrong most often, and what they themselves say they need training on.

The chart below is organised by Duty (a broad area of responsibility) and the Tasks within it. The right-hand column links each duty to the specific evidence that justifies its inclusion, so trainers can see why a topic is being taught and cite the same evidence to participants.

DACUM Duty–Task Chart for Local Cooking Fuel Manufacturers

2.2 Environmental and Social Safeguards

Manufacturing clean cooking fuels is not risk-free. Biomass densification carries dust and fire risk; biogas systems involve flammable gas and confined-space hazards; bioethanol production involves flammable vapours and, if mishandled, toxic contamination; and all four fuel streams generate waste streams that must be managed responsibly. This manual applies a consistent set of safeguards across every module, summarised here and repeated at the point of use in Part 3.

Environmental safeguards

·         Every production enterprise handling combustible dust, biogas, or ethanol vapour must have a basic fire-safety plan and the extinguisher class matched to its specific fire risk on site before production scale-up: Class A (Ordinary Combustibles) for biomass dust and fines, Class B (Flammable Liquids) for bioethanol fermentation and distillation areas, and CO₂ or dry powder extinguishers rated for electrical fires around biogas appliance connections and electric cooking assembly lines. The fire-class table in the box below gives the full breakdown by fuel stream.

·         Waste streams (biomass fines, digester slurry, ethanol stillage, packaging waste) must be managed according to NEMA guidance; enterprises above the applicable threshold require an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) licence.

·         Enterprises must not discharge untreated slurry or process water into water sources, and must apply basic spill-containment measures around fuel storage and blending areas; failure to do so is a breach of NEMA licence conditions and grounds for licence suspension.

 

This finding that 40% of the manufacturers are not yet NEMA compliant means environmental safeguards cannot be treated as a footnote. The compliance requirement itself is binary and non-negotiable: an enterprise either holds a valid NEMA registration/licence for its production scale, or it does not and must obtain one before continuing to operate at that scale there is no partial or approximate compliance status under EMCA. An enterprise actively preparing its NEMA application (Project Report or EIA Study Report submitted, pending review) should be described as "in the process of registration," not as "partially compliant." Part 5 of this manual gives the county-level pathway to NEMA registration in full.

 

Social and GEDSI safeguards (do-no-harm principle)

•    Training and mentorship must never expose a participant to increased risk of exclusion, harassment, or economic harm because of their gender, disability, age, or social status.

•    Facilitators must ensure physical accessibility of every venue and demonstration, provide materials in Kiswahili or the relevant local language where needed, and schedule sessions at times that do not systematically exclude women with caregiving responsibilities.

•    Where a session covers hazardous processes (ethanol distillation, digester gas handling, electrical assembly), facilitators must never allow a participant to handle equipment without first demonstrating the correct PPE and safe procedure.

•    Data collected from participants (enterprise financials, personal information) must be handled confidentially and used only for the stated training and mentorship purpose, consistent with the baseline survey's own ethical protocol of informed consent and anonymisation.

 

2.3 Assessment Criteria

Every session in this manual close with a set of Assessment Questions, and every module closes with a Module Quiz (Annex B2). The purpose is not to fail participants but to give trainers, mentors, and CCAK a reliable signal of what has actually been learned, so that follow-up support (Part 8) can be targeted rather than generic. At the end of the full manual, participants and trainers also complete a Manual Effectiveness Evaluation (Annex B5) so that CCAK can continuously improve the curriculum itself.

Certification: a participant is recommended to CCAK for a Certificate of Completion when they have (a) passed the module quiz for every module relevant to their fuel stream, (b) achieved a satisfactory rating on all safety- defined as every safety-critical item on the Practical Demonstration Rating Checklist (Annex B3) marked "Satisfactory" by the facilitator, meaning the participant completed that item correctly, safely, and without needing facilitator intervention or correction – on all safety-critical items in the practical demonstration checklist, and (c) submitted a completed Enterprise Action Plan. An item marked "Needs Improvement" on a safety-critical criterion means certification is deferred until the facilitator re-observes that specific item, either later the same day or at the first mentorship visit; non-safety-critical technique items marked "Needs Improvement" do not block certification but are logged for mentor follow-up. Certification is a recommendation, not a licence — it does not substitute for KEBS product certification or NEMA/EPRA regulatory approval, which follow the separate pathway described in Part 5.

PART 3:TECHNOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF COOKING FUELS

This part covers the core production technology for each of the four fuel streams: biomass pellets and briquettes, biogas, bioethanol, and electric cooking. Trainers deliver only the session(s) relevant to the participant group's manufacturing focus (see Part 1.4). Each session follows the manual's standard structure and, within Session Content, a consistent technical sequence: feedstock/inputs, production process with a visual flow diagram, key equipment, quality parameters, and safety.

3.1 Session: Biomass Pellets and Briquettes

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this session, participants will be able to:

1.   Identify suitable feedstock types and grading criteria for pellet and briquette production.

2.   Apply the seven-step densification process to produce pellets or briquettes that meet KEBS quality parameters.

3.   Analyse common production defects (poor binding, high fines, inconsistent size) against their root cause in the process.

4.   Demonstrate correct use and routine care of core densification equipment.

5.   Evaluate a finished batch against the five key quality parameters and decide whether it is fit for sale.

Session Overview

Biomass/pellet products are the single most common line of production among surveyed manufacturers: 60% of KII respondents manufacture pellets or biomass fuel as their primary product, and the wider baseline survey shows briquette production concentrated in Kisumu, Nakuru, and the coastal counties. Yet only 40% of manufacturers nationally apply formal quality control consistently, which means many enterprises are producing at commercial scale without a systematic way to catch the defects covered in this session. Mastering the process below is therefore the single highest-leverage technical skill this manual teaches.

Session Content

Feedstock

•    Agricultural residues: maize cobs and stover, rice husks, coffee husks, groundnut shells, sugarcane bagasse.

•    Forestry residues: sawdust, wood shavings, offcuts from timber processing.

•    Other biomass: bamboo, elephant grass and other energy-grass residues, screened municipal organic waste.

Trainer note: have participants grade a sample of each feedstock type available to the cohort by contaminant level (stones, metal, plastic) and moisture feel before moving to the process steps below this anchors Step 1 in something tangible.

1.    Collection and sorting of feedstock, removing stones, metal, and non-combustible contaminants.

2.    Size reduction (hammer-milling or chipping) to a uniform particle size, typically under 5mm for pelletising.

3.    Drying to a target moisture content of 10–15% feedstock above 15% moisture will not bind properly in the die.

4.    Densification: pelletising (ring-die or flat-die pellet mill) or briquetting (screw-press or piston-press), depending on target product and available capital.

5.    Cooling of hot pellets/briquettes to room temperature before packaging, to prevent moisture re-absorption and mould.

6.    Screening to remove fines and broken pellets, which are recycled back into the production line.

7.    Packaging in moisture-resistant bags, labelled with net weight, production date, and manufacturer details.

 

Quality parameters

·     Moisture content: typically, below 10% for finished pellets/briquettes.

·     Calorific value: higher heating value, the amount of heat energy released when 1 kilogram of fuel is fully combusted, measured in megajoules per kilogram (MJ/kg) the single figure buyers use to compare fuel value for money, typically 16–19 MJ/kg for good-quality biomass pellets. At classroom level, facilitators without access to a bomb calorimeter can still teach this concept practically: compare the boiling time for an equal volume of water using a fixed mass of the enterprise's own pellets against a reference sample of known calorific value, and relate a visibly longer boil time or shorter burn duration directly back to lower moisture or higher ash content covered above. Where a KIRDI or KEBS-accredited laboratory is accessible, arrange a batch sample test as part of the site visit so participants see an actual calorific value certificate.

·      Ash content: lower ash content improves burn quality and reduces stove maintenance.

·      Durability/fines: pellets should resist breaking into dust during handling and transport.

·      Uniform size and shape, consistent with the target stove specification.

Storage

•    Store finished pellets/briquettes off the ground on pallets, under a waterproof roof, with stock rotated on a first-in-first-out basis to prevent moisture re-absorption in older bags.

•    Keep dried feedstock and finished product in separate, clearly labelled storage zones to avoid contamination and confused stock counts.

Practical Exercise / Case Study

Case Study: Diagnosing a Failed Batch

Present the cohort with this scenario (adapt quantities to a real recent batch from the host enterprise where possible): 'A one-tonne batch of maize-cob pellets comes out of the press crumbling into dust, and roughly 20% is lost as fines during screening. The operator says the feedstock 'felt dry' before milling.' Working in small groups, participants:

1.    Identify which step(s) in the seven-step process could explain the defect (most likely: moisture content above 15% at densification, or insufficient die pressure).

2.    List the quality-check that should have caught this before the full batch was pressed.

3.    Propose the corrective action for the current batch and one process change to prevent recurrence.

4.    Report back in plenary; the facilitator confirms against the Quality Parameters above.

Key Takeaways

•    Moisture control at drying (10–15%) is the single most common point of failure in pellet/briquette production.

•    Every one of the seven process steps is also a quality-control checkpoint quality is built in, not inspected in at the end.

•    Fines and broken pellets should be recycled back into the line, not discarded, to protect margin.

•    Correct storage after cooling is what protects quality between production and sale.

Resources / Tools

•    Sample feedstock set (maize cobs, sawdust, rice husks) for grading practice.

•    Moisture meter (or simple hand-feel/squeeze-test guidance where a meter is unavailable).

•    Production flow poster (Figure 3.3), for display at the production site.

•    Exercise 5 -Quality Control Walk-Through (Part 6.2).

Assessment Questions

Use these questions (orally or written) to check whether the learning outcomes above have been achieved before closing the session:

1.    List three examples each of agricultural residue and forestry residue feedstock suitable for pelletising.

2.    What is the target moisture range before densification, and what happens if feedstock exceeds it?

3.    Name the seven steps of the production process in order.

4.    State two quality parameters used to judge a finished batch, and their typical acceptable range.

5.    A batch is producing excessive fines. Identify the two most likely causes and how you would confirm which one applies.

 

3.2 Session: Biogas

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this session, participants will be able to:

1.    Identify the feedstock, water ratio, and digester type appropriate to a given household, institutional, or commercial installation.

2.    Apply the seven-step installation and commissioning process for a biogas digester.

3.    Analyse gas storage and metering options and select the appropriate configuration for shared or chargeable connections.

4.    Evaluate a digester's performance against gas yield, methane content, retention time, and leak-tightness parameters.

5.    Demonstrate the soap-water leak-check procedure before handover to a client.

Session Overview

Biogas installation and fabrication is a technically demanding stream: it combines masonry or fabrication skill, biological process understanding, and gas-handling safety. Manufacturers in this stream report equipment breakdown and installation-process inconsistency among their top technical challenges (KII), which is why this session pairs every process step with the specific quality checkpoint that catches it early including storage and metering, which determine whether an installation can serve more than one paying household reliably.

Session Content

Feedstock

•    Livestock manure (cattle, pig, poultry) - the most common feedstock for household and institutional digesters.

•    Food and market waste, abattoir waste, and agro-processing residues for larger commercial digesters.

•    Water: manure/waste is typically mixed with water at roughly 1:1 to form a slurry suitable for anaerobic digestion.

Digester types manufactured in Kenya

Production/installation process

Figure 3.4 — Biogas digester installation flow, from site assessment through to appliance connection.

1.    Site assessment: proximity to livestock housing or waste source, soil type (for fixed-dome), distance from kitchen and water source.

2.    Sizing the digester to the available daily feedstock volume and the household or institution's daily gas demand.

3.    Excavation and construction (fixed-dome) or site preparation and installation (flexible/prefabricated).

4.    Installation of inlet, outlet (for slurry/bio-slurry removal), gas pipe, water trap, and pressure gauge.

5.    Commissioning: initial loading, monitoring gas production over the first 2–4 weeks until stable output is reached.

6.    Connection to the cooking appliance (biogas burner/stove), with a pressure-regulating and safety shut-off fitting.

Gas storage options

•    Fixed-dome storage: gas is stored under the masonry dome itself; pressure builds as gas accumulates and displaces slurry into the outlet chamber. No separate storage vessel required, but pressure varies through the day.

•    Floating-drum storage: a separate steel or plastic drum floats on the digester slurry or on a water seal, rising as gas accumulates; gives more constant pressure than a fixed dome, at extra fabrication cost.

•    Balloon/bag storage: the flexible digester bag itself acts as the storage vessel, or a separate storage balloon is connected downstream for larger or shared systems, giving flexible, low-cost buffer capacity.

•   External storage bags/cylinders: used where gas needs to be transported short distances or stored for use away from the digester, such as a shared cooking point serving several households.

Metering for shared and chargeable connections

Where a digester serves more than one household or a shared institutional kitchen on a pay-per-use basis, manufacturers should fit a gas flow meter (mechanical diaphragm or, increasingly, prepaid/smart meters) at each connection point before the appliance. This allows the operator to bill fairly by volume used rather than by flat fee, protects against over-consumption by any one household, and gives the operator the usage data needed to plan digester sizing for future connections. Facilitators should demonstrate reading a meter and calculating a simple volume-based charge during the practical exercise below.

Quality and performance parameters

•    Gas yield: typically, 0.3–0.5 m³ of biogas per kg of fresh manure, varying with feedstock and temperature.

•    Methane content: well-functioning digesters typically produce biogas that is 55–65% methane.

•    Retention time: typically, 30–50 days depending on digester size and ambient temperature.

•    Leak-tightness of the gas storage and piping system, tested with a soap-water leak check before handover.

Practical Exercise / Case Study

Exercise: Site Assessment and Metered-Connection Design

In small groups, working from a real or described site (a shared compound with three households, or an institutional kitchen):

1.    Assess the site against the Step 1 criteria (proximity, soil type, distance from kitchen/water) and recommend a digester type from the table above.

2.    Size the digester to the daily feedstock volume and combined household gas demand.

3.    Design the storage configuration (dome, floating drum, or bag) and decide whether metering is needed for this site.

4.    If metering is needed, sketch where each meter sits in the pipe run and calculate an example volume-based charge for one household's monthly usage.

5.    Present the design to the group, including the leak-check step that must precede handover.

Key Takeaways

•    Every digester installation follows the same seven steps regardless of digester type; only the construction/installation step (Step 3) differs by type.

•    Storage method should match the use case: fixed-dome and balloon designs store gas within the digester itself; floating-drum and external bags give more constant pressure or portability at extra cost.

•    Metering is essential wherever a digester serves a shared or chargeable connection — it protects both the operator's revenue and fair access for all connected households.

•   A soap-water leak check is mandatory before every handover; never rely on smell alone to confirm leak-tightness.

Resources / Tools

•    Digester type comparison poster (table above).

•    Sample gas flow meter for hands-on demonstration.

•    Soap-water solution and brush for leak-check demonstration.

•    Exercise 5 - Quality Control Walk-Through (Part 6.2), adapted for biogas leak-tightness and gas-yield checks.

Assessment Questions

Use these questions (orally or written) to check whether the learning outcomes above have been achieved before closing the session:

1.    Name the four digester types manufactured in Kenya and one advantage of each.

2.    What is the typical water-to-manure ratio used to form digestion slurry?

3.    List the four gas storage options and state which is best suited to a shared, multi-household connection.

4.    Why is metering recommended for shared or chargeable biogas connections, and what type of meter would you use?

5.    Describe how you would carry out a soap-water leak check before handover.

3.3 Session: Bioethanol

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this session, participants will be able to:

1.    Identify sugar-rich and starch-rich feedstock suitable for bioethanol production and the additional step starch feedstock requires.

2.    Apply the six-step production process from extraction through to bottling.

3.    Analyse purity-test results using a hydrometer or refractometer and determine whether a batch meets cooking-fuel grade.

4.    Demonstrate correct spark-free handling practice during fermentation and distillation.

5.    Evaluate finished product packaging against KEBS labelling and hazard-marking requirements.

Session Overview

30% of KII respondents manufacture bioethanol as their primary product the second most common line after biomass/pellets making this a priority stream for many cohorts. Bioethanol carries the highest safety stakes of the four fuel streams covered in this manual, because both the process (flammable vapours) and the product (a toxic risk if contaminated with methanol) can harm people if mishandled. This session is deliberately sequenced so that every process step is immediately followed by its safety and quality implication.

Session Content

Feedstock

•    Sugar-rich crops: sugarcane juice/molasses, sweet sorghum juice, sugar beet.

•    Starch-rich crops: cassava, requiring an additional enzymatic conversion (starch to sugar) step before fermentation.

•    Purchased industrial or agro-industrial ethanol as feedstock for manufacturers who blend/gel and package rather than distil from raw crops.

1.    Extraction: pressing juice from sugarcane/sweet sorghum, or liquefying and saccharifying cassava starch into fermentable sugars.

2.    Fermentation: yeast converts sugars into ethanol and carbon dioxide over 2–4 days in a controlled fermentation tank.

3.    Distillation: heating the fermented wash to separate ethanol (boiling point ~78°C) from water and other components, typically requiring multiple passes to reach fuel-grade purity.

4.    Dehydration/rectification: further purification to reduce water content below the fuel-grade threshold (typically above 90–95% ethanol by volume for cooking fuel).

5.    Denaturing (where required) to render the product unsuitable for beverage consumption mandatory for cooking-fuel ethanol under KRA excise requirements, using a denaturant appropriate for indoor household cooking use (KS 2838:2019); this step is removed only where the enterprise is producing under a separate, non-cooking excise category that does not require denaturing.

6.    Blending or gelling (for gel-fuel products), and bottling in KEBS-compliant, child-resistant, and clearly labelled containers.

 

Quality parameters

•    Ethanol purity: minimum 90–95% by volume for cooking-fuel grade, verified with a hydrometer or refractometer before bottling.

•    Absence of methanol contamination, which is toxic and dangerous in fuel intended for household use.

•    Consistent viscosity and burn characteristics for gel-fuel products - a clean, steady blue flame with minimal soot or smoke, a burn rate that matches the product's stated cook-time claim, and an even gel set with no separation of liquid ethanol from the gelling agent on standing. Facilitators should demonstrate a live burn test side-by-side with a poor-quality sample (yellow/orange flame, visible soot, or uneven burn) so participants can recognise the difference by sight and smell; where a live burn is not practical for the venue, use a short-recorded video of both burns instead.

•    Secure, leak-proof, and correctly labelled packaging, including hazard symbols and safe-use instructions.

Practical Exercise / Case Study

Exercise: Purity Testing and Batch Release Decision

Using a hydrometer/ethanol test kit and, where available, sample fermented wash at different distillation stages, participants in small groups:

1.    Take a hydrometer or refractometer reading of a sample and record the percentage ethanol by volume.

2.    Compare the reading against the 90–95% cooking-fuel-grade threshold and decide: release, re-distil, or reject.

3.    Identify which process step (extraction, fermentation, distillation, or dehydration) is most likely responsible if purity is below threshold.

4.    Complete a mock batch-release record noting the test result, decision, and denaturing/labelling status.

Key Takeaways

•    Purity testing with a hydrometer or refractometer is non-negotiable before any batch is bottled  it is the single check that protects consumers from methanol risk and ensures burn performance.

•    Cassava and other starch feedstocks need an extra saccharification step that sugar-rich feedstocks do not.

•    Denaturing is a regulatory requirement tied to KRA excise compliance, not an optional production choice.

•    Packaging is a quality parameter, not just a compliance formality leak-proof, correctly labelled containers with hazard symbols are part of a safe, sellable product.

Resources / Tools

•    Hydrometer or refractometer and sample fermented wash for the purity-testing exercise.

•    KEBS labelling and hazard-symbol reference sheet.

•    Batch-release record template (Part 4.4, Record-Keeping).

Assessment Questions

Use these questions (orally or written) to check whether the learning outcomes above have been achieved before closing the session:

1.    Name two sugar-rich and one starch-rich feedstock used for bioethanol production.

2.    What additional processing step does cassava require compared with sugarcane juice?

3.    List the six steps of the production process in order.

4.    What is the minimum ethanol purity, by volume, required for cooking-fuel grade, and how is it verified?

5.    Why is denaturing required, and what regulator's requirement does it satisfy?

 

3.4 Session: Electric Cooking

By the end of this session, participants will be able to:

1.    Identify appliance categories manufactured or assembled locally, including hybrid and non-hybrid electric cooking appliances.

2.    Apply the five-step assembly and quality process from component sourcing through to after-sales set-up.

3.    Demonstrate correct wiring, earthing, and insulation-resistance checks on an assembled appliance.

4.    Evaluate an appliance against electrical safety, energy efficiency, and thermal safety parameters before release.

5.    Analyse the appropriate appliance category for a given household or institutional cooking need.

Session Overview

Electric cooking is the fastest-diversifying fuel stream covered in this manual. Electric pressure cookers remain the most widely locally assembled category, but demand for simpler, non-hybrid appliances rice cookers, ugali makers, and standard non-pressurised electric cooking pots is growing quickly alongside Kenya's eCooking Strategy targets, and manufacturers report these as an increasingly important product line even though they require simpler assembly and testing than hybrid or pressurised units. This session covers the full appliance range so trainers can serve any assembler in the room.

Session Content

Appliance categories

•    Electric pressure cookers (EPCs) the most widely locally assembled electric appliance category in Kenya, produced primarily in Nairobi.

•    Induction cookers and hotplates.

•    Hybrid appliances (solar-electric, PAYG-enabled electric cooking devices).

•   Non-hybrid electric cooking appliances a fast-growing category that includes electric rice cookers, ugali makers/stiff-porridge cookers, and standard (non-pressurised) electric cooking pots. These operate at atmospheric pressure, which simplifies both assembly and safety testing relative to pressure cookers, and are increasingly assembled by the same small enterprises that produce EPCs.

 

Manufacturer/assembler role and process

1.    Component or appliance sourcing, verifying supplier component quality and electrical safety ratings.

2.    Assembly and wiring checks, including insulation and earthing verification.

3.    Safety and performance testing (electrical safety, thermal performance, energy efficiency) before release.

4.    Labelling and packaging in line with KEBS appliance-labelling requirements, specifically: KS IEC 60335-1 (household electrical appliance general safety requirements) for the safety/rating label, and KS IEC 60350-1 or -2 (electric cooking appliance performance) for performance and energy labelling where the appliance category is covered  noting that KEBS lab testing currently covers electrical safety only, not full performance verification, for EPCs and induction cookers, so a performance label should not be presented to trainees as independently verified until KEBS confirms otherwise. At minimum, every unit should carry: manufacturer/assembler name and address, rated voltage/wattage, model and batch/serial number, country of origin, and the KEBS mark once certified.

5.    Distribution and after-sales service setup, including spare-parts availability and warranty terms.

Assembly notes specific to non-hybrid appliances

•    Rice cookers and ugali makers use a simpler thermostat/heating-element assembly than pressure cookers, but still require full earthing and insulation checks never skip Step 2 because the appliance 'has no pressure component'.

•    Non-pressurised pots and rice cookers should still be tested for even heat distribution and automatic cut-off/keep-warm function where fitted, as part of Step 3.

•    These appliances are often the first electric cooking product a household buys; clear, simple end-user instruction (see Part 6.4.4) matters even more for this category, since users may be new to electric cooking altogether.

Quality and safety parameters

•    Electrical safety: correct earthing, insulation resistance, and overcurrent protection.

•    Energy efficiency: verified wattage and cook-time performance against the appliance's stated specification.

•    Thermal safety: surface temperature and heat-retention characteristics that do not pose a burn risk under normal use.

•   Durability of housing, handles, and control components under repeated use.

Practical Exercise / Case Study

Exercise: Bench Testing an Assembled Appliance

Using a sample appliance (an EPC or a non-hybrid rice cooker/ugali maker, depending on the cohort's product line), participants in small groups:

1.    Carry out a visual inspection for correct wiring and housing assembly.

2.    Perform an earthing and insulation-resistance check using the appliance testing bench.

3.    Record cook-time and energy-use performance against the appliance's stated specification.

4.    Complete a safety test record and decide: release, rework, or reject.

5.    For non-hybrid appliances, additionally confirm even heat distribution and correct function of any automatic cut-off.

Key Takeaways

•    Non-hybrid appliances (rice cookers, ugali makers, standard cooking pots) are a growing, distinct product category and require the same five-step process and full safety testing as pressure cookers simplicity of design does not mean simplicity of quality control.

•    Earthing and insulation check at Step 2 are the single most important safety control in this session.

•    No appliance should leave the production line without a completed safety test record.

•    After-sales service set-up (spare parts, warranty) is part of the manufacturer's role, not an afterthought.

Resources / Tools

•    Appliance testing bench (continuity/insulation tester).

•    Sample EPC and, where available, a sample non-hybrid appliance (rice cooker or ugali maker).

•    KEBS appliance-labelling requirements reference sheet.

•    Safety test record template.

Assessment Questions

Use these questions (orally or written) to check whether the learning outcomes above have been achieved before closing the session:

1.    List the four appliance categories covered in this session, including at least two examples of non-hybrid appliances.

2.    Name the five steps of the assembly and quality process in order.

3.    Why must earthing and insulation checks still be carried out on a non-pressurised rice cooker or ugali maker?

4.    State three electrical/safety parameters an appliance must meet before release.

5.    What after-sales elements should a manufacturer set up before distributing an appliance?

 

PART 4:BUSINESS AND MARKET SKILLS

Technical production skill alone does not build a resilient enterprise. Manufacturers interviewed for this manual ranked market access strategies as their single highest business-training priority (70%), ahead of business planning (60%), Participatory Market Systems Development (50%), costing and pricing (40%), and record-keeping (40%). This part is organised to answer that ranking directly.

4.1 Session: Entrepreneurship Skills

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this session, participants will be able to:

1.    Identify market opportunities for clean cooking products and services based on verified customer demand and market gaps.

2.    Assess common business risks and determine appropriate strategies to mitigate, transfer, avoid, or manage them.

3.    Compare different enterprise growth pathways, including organic growth and external financing, and select approaches appropriate to their business stage.

4.    Apply entrepreneurial decision-making skills to strengthen the resilience and competitiveness of their manufacturing enterprise.

Session Overview

An enterprise's survival for several years the manufacturers consulted for this manual have operated for a mean of 5.5 years is itself evidence of entrepreneurial resilience. This session builds on that resilience rather than starting from a blank slate, and gives participants a language and a structure (opportunity recognition, risk management, growth planning) for decisions they are often already making instinctively.

Session Content

Opportunity recognition

Identifying gaps in local supply of clean cooking fuel, and matching production capacity to real, verified demand rather than assumed demand. Trainers should push participants to name their evidence for demand (orders on hand, waiting customers, a specific gap they have observed) rather than accept a general belief that 'demand is there'.

Risk management

Understanding which risks feedstock price swings, seasonal demand, equipment failure are insurable, avoidable, or must be absorbed as a cost of doing business. Facilitators should work through at least one risk in each category with the group:

Growth planning

Distinguishing between organic growth (reinvested profit) and financed growth (loans, grants, equity), and the trade-offs of each depth of control retained versus speed of scale-up. This links directly to the finance options covered in Session 4.2.

Practical Exercise / Case Study

Exercise: Enterprise Self-Assessment

In pairs, participants complete a short structured self-assessment of their own enterprise against five dimensions: production consistency, quality control, record-keeping, market reach, and workforce inclusion.

1.    Score each of the five dimensions 1 (informal/ad hoc) to 5 (systematic/documented).

2.    Identify the lowest-scoring dimension.

3.    Write one specific, 90-day action to improve it.

4.    Carry that action forward as the first entry in the Enterprise Action Plan (Annex C1).

Key Takeaways

•    Years survived in business is real evidence of entrepreneurial skill — this session names and structures what participants are often already doing.

•    Not every risk needs the same response: separate what can be insured, what can be avoided, and what must simply be planned for.

•    Organic and financed growth are not mutually exclusive; most enterprises will use both at different stages.

Resources / Tools

•    Enterprise Self-Assessment worksheet (Exercise 2, Part 6.2).

•    Enterprise Action Plan template (Annex C1).

Assessment Questions

Use these questions (orally or written) to check whether the learning outcomes above have been achieved before closing the session:

1.    What is the difference between assumed demand and verified demand, and why does it matter before scaling production?

2.    Give one example each of an insurable risk, an avoidable risk, and a risk that must be managed/absorbed in this sector.

3.    Compare organic growth and financed growth: name one advantage and one trade-off of each.

4.    Which of the five self-assessment dimensions scored lowest for your enterprise, and what action will you take in the next 90 days?

4.2 Session: Financial Literacy

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this session, participants will be able to:

1.    Define working capital, cash flow, and depreciation and explain why each matters for a manufacturing enterprise.

2.    Analyse an enterprise's short-term working capital needs against its production and sales cycle.

3.    Compare finance sources available to Kenyan clean-cooking manufacturers and match each to an appropriate enterprise stage.

4.    Apply basic readiness criteria to assess whether an enterprise is ready to approach a given finance source.

Session Overview

The baseline survey found that 65.8% of manufacturing firms nationally have no access to formal credit, relying instead on personal savings, SACCOs, or microfinance institutions and that collateral requirements are a significant barrier, with women- and youth-led enterprises more likely to report difficulty meeting lending conditions. Encouragingly, the KII cohort shows that 90% of enterprises already keep some form of formal financial record, most commonly sales and expense records a foundation this session builds on rather than starts from zero.

Session Content

Core concepts

•    Working capital: the cash needed to cover day-to-day input purchases, wages, and overheads between production and sale.

•    Cash flow vs. profit: an enterprise can be profitable on paper while running out of cash if receivables and payables are not managed.

•    Depreciation: setting aside a share of revenue to eventually replace equipment, rather than treating equipment as a one-off cost.

Access to finance

Practical Exercise / Case Study

Exercise: Match the Finance Source

Give each pair three short enterprise profiles (e.g. a two-year-old micro-enterprise with no registration; a five-year-old registered enterprise with two years of sales records; a growth-stage enterprise seeking capital for a second production line). Participants:

1.    Match each profile to the one or two most appropriate finance sources from the table.

2.    Identify what the enterprise would need to put in place before approaching that source (e.g. registration, financial records, collateral).

3.    Share back in plenary; the facilitator confirms against the readiness criteria in the table.

Key Takeaways

•    Working capital and profit are not the same thing - an enterprise can be profitable and still run out of cash.

•    Commercial bank credit is not out of reach for most enterprises forever, but it does require registration, records, and often collateral to be built up first.

•    Microfinance is generally the better fit for short-term working capital needs, not long-term capital investment.

•    Depreciation set-asides protect an enterprise's ability to replace equipment without an emergency loan.

Resources / Tools

•    Access-to-finance comparison table (above), printed as a handout.

•   Simple monthly cash-flow template (see Part 4.4, Record-Keeping).

Assessment Questions

Use these questions (orally or written) to check whether the learning outcomes above have been achieved before closing the session:

1.    Explain, in your own words, the difference between cash flow and profit.

2.    Why is depreciation important even for a small enterprise?

3.    Which finance source is best suited to short-term working capital needs, and why?

4.    What must an enterprise typically have in place before it can access commercial bank credit?

5.    Name one finance source that is increasingly tied to demonstrated climate or environmental performance.

4.3 Session: Costing and Pricing

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this session, participants will be able to:

1.    Identify every cost item that contributes to the true production cost of a batch.

2.    Apply the standard costing worksheet to calculate a floor price for a production batch.

3.    Analyse the relationship between margin, competitor pricing, and long-term enterprise viability.

4.    Develop a recommended selling price for their own enterprise's product using their own recent input costs.

Session Overview

Only 40% of manufacturers surveyed nationally use formal costing and pricing methods consistently; 50% do so only sometimes or partially, and 10% do not cost their products formally at all. Pricing without a floor-price calculation is one of the most common reasons a manufacturing enterprise stays profitable on paper but short of cash this session gives participants a repeatable, simple costing worksheet they can apply to any production batch, in any fuel stream.

Session Content

Facilitators should repeat this worksheet structure for the fuel stream(s) present in the room, substituting the cost items relevant to biogas installation, bioethanol production, or electric appliance assembly, using each enterprise's own recent input costs where possible

Practical Exercise / Case Study

Exercise: Costing Worksheet

Using your own enterprise's most recent production batch:

1.    List every cost item (feedstock, labour, energy, packaging, depreciation) with its actual recent cost.

2.    Calculate total cost per unit and compare it against your current selling price.

3.    If your margin is below 15%, identify one cost item you could reduce, or one efficiency gain from Part 3, that would restore a healthy margin.

4.    Record the calculated floor price on your Enterprise Action Plan (Annex C1).

Key Takeaways

•    A floor price must cover every real cost, including depreciation  not just the visible cash costs of feedstock and labour.

•    Pricing below the floor price is a hidden loss even when a batch appears to sell well.

•    Margin should be checked against local competitive pricing, not set in isolation.

•    The costing worksheet structure is the same across every fuel stream; only the specific cost items change.

Resources / Tools

•    Costing worksheet template (Annex D handout, matching the worked example above).

•    Exercise 3 Costing Worksheet (Part 6.2).

Assessment Questions

Use these questions (orally or written) to check whether the learning outcomes above have been achieved before closing the session:

1.    List the five cost categories included in the worked costing example.

2.    Why must equipment depreciation be included in a floor-price calculation, even though it is not a cash cost paid that day?

3.    Using the worked example, what is the production cost per kilogram?

4.    If your calculated margin is below 15%, name two possible corrective actions.

5.    Calculate a floor price for your own enterprise's most recent batch using the worksheet.

4.4 Session: Record-Keeping

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this session, participants will be able to:

1.    Identify the twelve categories of business record relevant to a manufacturing enterprise and the purpose of each.

2.    Apply the standard sales, expense, and production log templates to a sample day of enterprise activity.

3.    Analyse an enterprise's current record-keeping practice against the categories most linked to finance and certification readiness.

4.    Develop a simple, sustainable record-keeping routine appropriate to their enterprise's size and literacy levels.

Session Overview

Record-keeping is the foundation for costing, finance access, and certification alike. Among manufacturers who keep formal records, the most common types are sales records (80%), expense records (70%), payroll/employee records (50%), inventory/stock records (40%), and tax/financial statements (20%) a pattern that shows most firms track revenue before they track cost and compliance data, which this session works to correct.

Session Content

Practical templates

•    Daily sales log: date, product, quantity, unit price, buyer, invoice number.

•    Expense log: date, item, supplier, amount, payment method, category (feedstock, labour, energy, transport, other).

•    Production log: batch number, production date, feedstock source, input quantity, output quantity, quality-check result, operator.

•    Inventory register: opening stock, receipts, issues, closing stock.

•    Equipment maintenance log: equipment, maintenance date, maintenance performed, maintenance provider/personnel, next service date.

•    Monthly profit summary: total sales, total expenses, gross profit, net profit, and cash balance for the month.

Practical Exercise / Case Study

Exercise: Fill a Day's Records

Using a short-narrated scenario of one production day (a batch produced, inputs bought, a sale made), participants in pairs:

1.    Complete a sample sales log entry and expense log entry from the scenario.

2.    Complete a sample production log entry, including the quality-check result.

3.    Identify which of the twelve record categories their own enterprise is missing or keeps inconsistently.

4.    Commit to one record category to formalise in the next 30 days and add it to the Enterprise Action Plan.

Key Takeaways

•    Sales and expense records are usually kept first; quality-control, environmental, and tax records are usually kept last and are exactly the records finance and certification bodies ask for.

•    A record system only needs to be as complex as the enterprise can sustain simple, consistent logs beat elaborate systems that are abandoned after a month.

•    Good records are the direct input to costing (Session 4.3) and to KEBS/finance readiness (Part 5).

Resources / Tools

•    Blank templates for all six practical logs above (Annex D handouts).

•    Sample completed log sheets for demonstration.

Assessment Questions

Use these questions (orally or written) to check whether the learning outcomes above have been achieved before closing the session:

1.    Name at least eight of the twelve record categories covered in this session.

2.    Which record type is most commonly kept, and which is least commonly kept, among manufacturers surveyed?

3.    What information belongs in a production log entry?

4.    Why do quality control and environmental records matter for certification, not just for internal management?

5.    Which one record category will you formalise in your own enterprise in the next 30 days?

4.5 Session: Market Systems Thinking (Participatory Market Systems Development)

 

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this session, participants will be able to:

1.    Explain what Participatory Market Systems Development (PMSD) is and how its three layers interact to shape an enterprise's opportunities and risks.

2.    Apply value chain mapping to place their own enterprise correctly within the wider biofuel/clean-cooking market system.

3.    Conduct a stakeholder analysis to identify the actors whose decisions most affect their enterprise's performance.

4.    Analyse their enterprise's constraints and opportunities across the core market, supporting functions, and rules layers of the market system.

5.    Develop a prioritised, dated enterprise action plan that strengthens one specific weak link in their market system.

Session Overview

A manufacturer who understands the full market system not just their own production can identify where they add the most value, where their biggest risks sit, and which relationships are worth investing in first. Nationally, 90% of manufacturers sell direct to end consumers, while only 30% each sell through retailers, distributors/agents, or online/social media, and just 10% sell through NGOs or development programmes indicating significant unrealised potential in diversifying sales channels that this session helps participants act on.

This is a newer area for many cohorts, so the session is built to teach the concept in full before moving straight into practical tools value chain mapping, stakeholder analysis, constraint and opportunity analysis, risk assessment, and enterprise action planning that participants apply directly to their own business. By the end, participants leave with a completed market system map and a specific, dated action for their Enterprise Action Plan, not just an introduction to a new idea.

Session Content

What is PMSD, and why does it matter to a manufacturer?

Participatory Market Systems Development (PMSD) is an approach to understanding and strengthening the whole market a business operates in not just the transaction between a manufacturer and its immediate buyer. Most manufacturers naturally focus on their 'core market': what they produce and who buys it. PMSD asks trainers and participants to also examine two other layers that quietly determine whether the core market works well: the supporting functions that make trade possible (finance, transport, information, skills, testing), and the rules that govern how the market operates (standards, licensing, taxation, environmental regulation).

The insight behind PMSD is simple but powerful: a manufacturer can have an excellent product and a willing buyer, and still fail because transport is unreliable, because no lender will finance the stock they need to fulfil a large order, or because a regulation they did not understand blocks a sale. Strengthening a market system means identifying which of these three layers is the weakest link for a given enterprise, and acting on it deliberately, rather than only working harder within the core market.

The three layers of a market system

These three layers do not operate in isolation they interact constantly, and a change in one often affects the others. A new KEBS standard (a rule) can create demand for a testing laboratory (a supporting function); a new SACCO loan product (a supporting function) can allow a producer to reach a bulk buyer (the core market) they previously could not supply at scale.

Illustration: reading a market system map

The diagram below is a worked example of a complete market system map for a biofuel value chain, in the same three-layer structure participants will build for their own enterprise in the exercise that follows. Facilitators should walk through it column by column before participants attempt their own map: the core market runs vertically down the left (feedstock farmers through to end users); supporting functions and rules sit to the right, connected to the core market by the dashed arrows that show where each one intervenes.

 

Reading the map with participants

•    Trace the core market column first: feedstock farmers supply a feedstock aggregator, who supplies the fuel producer (the manufacturer  the role most participants occupy), who sells on to retailers and bulk buyers, who in turn reach households and institutions.

•    Point out the dashed double-headed arrows connecting the fuel producer to Supporting Functions and Regulations these show that the producer does not only trade with the next actor in the chain; it also depends on and is shaped by finance, transport, training, testing, information, and the five categories of rules shown.

•   Ask participants: 'Which of the six supporting functions is currently weakest for your enterprise? Which of the five rule categories has caused you the most difficulty?' Their answers set up the constraint and opportunity analysis tool below.

Practical tool 1 — Value chain mapping

Value chain mapping places an enterprise correctly within the core market layer, showing exactly which actors, it buys from and sells to, and where value (and risk) is added at each step.

•    List every input the enterprise buys, and from whom (supplier name or type).

•    List every output the enterprise sells, and to whom (buyer name or type -retailer, bulk buyer, direct household).

•    Mark where the enterprise adds value between input and output (processing, quality assurance, packaging, branding).

•   Identify any step in the chain the enterprise could move into or strengthen (e.g. a pellet producer starting to bag and brand for retail rather than selling loose to a single buyer).

Practical tool 2 — Stakeholder analysis

Stakeholder analysis identifies the specific actors - beyond direct buyers and sellers - whose decisions most affect the enterprise, and how much influence and interest each one has.

Practical tool 3 — Constraint and opportunity analysis

Working layer by layer, participants identify the single biggest constraint and the single biggest opportunity in each of the three market system layers.

Practical Exercise / Case Study

Group Exercise: Draw Your Market System and Build Your Action Plan

Working individually or in small groups of participants from similar enterprises, using flip-chart paper divided into the three layers shown in Figure 4.2:

1.    Map your own core market: list your suppliers, your own enterprise, and your buyers, in sequence, as in Practical tool 1.

2.    Add the supporting functions your enterprise currently uses or lacks (finance, transport, training, testing, market information), as in Figure 4.2.

3.    Add the rules that affect your enterprise (standards, licensing, taxation, environmental requirements), as in Figure 4.2.

4.    Complete a short stakeholder analysis (Practical tool 2) for the two or three actors with the most influence over your enterprise.

5.    Identify your single biggest constraint and single biggest opportunity across the three layers (Practical tool 3), and assess the risk of leaving the constraint unaddressed (Practical tool 4).

6.    Write one specific, dated action that would strengthen your weakest layer, and add it to your Enterprise Action Plan (Annex C1).

7.    Present your map and chosen action to the group in two minutes; the facilitator and peers give one suggestion each.

Key Takeaways

•    PMSD looks beyond the core market (buyers and sellers) to the supporting functions and rules that quietly determine whether a manufacturer can succeed.

•    The three layers interact -a change in rules or supporting functions often opens or closes opportunities in the core market.

•    Value chain mapping and stakeholder analysis are the starting tools; constraint/opportunity analysis and risk assessment turn that map into a decision about where to act first.

•    Diversifying sales channels beyond direct-to-consumer is the single most commonly available opportunity across the sector (only 30% of manufacturers currently sell through retailers, distributors, or online channels).

•    Every market system map should end in one specific, dated action on the Enterprise Action Plan  this session is a business-planning exercise, not only an introduction to a concept.

Resources / Tools

•    Figure 4.2 — Biofuel Market System illustration, reproduced as a standalone poster for group work (Part 6.3).

•    Flip-chart paper and markers for the market system mapping exercise (Exercise 4, Part 6.2).

•    Stakeholder analysis and constraint/opportunity analysis worksheets (Annex D handouts).

•    Enterprise Action Plan template (Annex C1).

Assessment Questions

Use these questions (orally or written) to check whether the learning outcomes above have been achieved before closing the session:

1.    In your own words, what is Participatory Market Systems Development, and how is it different from only looking at your buyers and sellers?

2.    Name the three layers of a market system and give one example of each from the clean cooking fuel sector.

3.    Using the illustration in Figure 4.2, name two supporting functions and two categories of rules that connect to the fuel producer.

4.    What is the difference between a value chain map and a stakeholder analysis, and what does each tell you that the other does not?

5.    What is your enterprise's single biggest constraint, in which layer does it sit, and what action have you added to your Enterprise Action Plan to address it?

 

PART 5:COMPLIANCE AND MARKET ACCESS

Compliance is the gateway to every higher-value market: institutional procurement, export, and carbon finance all require verifiable standards compliance. Yet nationally only 38.9% of firms hold any product or enterprise certification, and 45.5% remain unregistered altogether. This part treats compliance as a sequenced, achievable pathway rather than a single hurdle, in line with what manufacturers themselves have asked for and every session below is written as a step-by-step training guide, not a summary of findings.

Facilitators should confirm current fees and procedures with the relevant county trade/environment office or the CCAK county focal point before each cohort, since County Finance Acts are updated annually.

 

5.1 Session: Business Registration and Compliance Foundations

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this session, participants will be able to:

1.    Identify the types of business registration available in Kenya and select the appropriate structure for their enterprise.

2.    Apply the step-by-step process to register a business name or company, obtain a KRA PIN, and secure a county single business permit.

3.    Explain the tax obligations that apply to a registered manufacturing enterprise, including VAT and excise where relevant.

4.    Determine whether their enterprise requires NITA registration and describe the process for obtaining it.

5.    Assemble the document checklist required for their own enterprise's registration status.

Session Overview

This foundational session applies to every fuel stream and should be delivered before the fuel-specific compliance pathways in Sessions 5.2–5.5. Awareness of the step-by-step certification process for their own fuel type remains a real gap nationally: 70% of manufacturers report being only partially aware of the process, 20% are not aware at all, and only 10% report being fully aware. This session closes that gap by walking participants through the actual registration types, requirements, and document checklist  not by describing the process in the abstract.

Session Content

Types of business registration in Kenya

Step-by-step: registering a business name or company

1.    Search and reserve a business/company name through the eCitizen Business Registration Service (BRS) portal.

2.    Prepare the required documents: national ID/passport copies of the owner(s) or directors, passport photos, and for a company  a Memorandum and Articles of Association.

3.    Submit the registration application and pay the applicable fee through eCitizen.

4.    Receive the Business Name Registration Certificate or Certificate of Incorporation once approved.

5.    Apply for a KRA PIN for the business (see below), which is required for almost every subsequent compliance and finance step.

6.    Apply for the county single business permit for the specific business location (see below).

KRA PIN registration and tax obligations

•    Every registered enterprise must obtain a KRA PIN through the iTax/eCitizen system, using the business registration certificate as supporting documentation. The PIN is required to open a business bank account, apply for most licences, and bid for institutional contracts.

•    Income tax: registered enterprises file periodic income tax returns based on their business structure — sole proprietors and partners are taxed as individuals; limited companies file corporate income tax.

•    VAT registration becomes mandatory once annual taxable turnover exceeds the current statutory threshold; enterprises below the threshold may register voluntarily to reclaim input VAT on equipment and inputs.

•    Excise duty applies specifically to bioethanol manufacturers - see Session 5.4 for the excise licensing and denaturing requirements that apply to this fuel stream.

•    Turnover Tax (TOT) is a simplified tax regime available to smaller enterprises below the VAT threshold, and may be a more appropriate starting point for micro and small manufacturers than full income tax registration - participants should confirm current thresholds with a KRA office or tax agent before choosing a regime.

County single business permit

Renewed annually at the relevant county government offices (or via the county's e-payment platform where available) - 80% of manufacturers interviewed already hold current county-level operating permits, making this the compliance step with the highest existing uptake. The permit is tied to the specific business premises and must be renewed before expiry to avoid penalties.

NITA registration

The National Industrial Training Authority (NITA) registration applies to enterprises that conduct structured apprenticeship, on-the-job training, or that employ staff and pay the statutory Industrial Training Levy. Manufacturers who take on trainees or apprentices - including through this manual's own training and mentorship pathway -should register to formalise that role.

1.    Confirm whether the enterprise falls within a NITA-designated trade or industry category (manufacturing of biomass fuels, biogas installation, and appliance assembly typically qualify).

2.    Register the enterprise with NITA and register any structured apprenticeship or training programme offered.

3.    Pay the Industrial Training Levy where applicable, based on the enterprise's employee numbers.

4.    Maintain training records for apprentices/trainees, which also support the enterprise's own record-keeping practice (Session 4.4).

Document checklist for registration readiness

•    National ID/passport for all owners or directors.

•    Passport photographs of all owners or directors.

•    Proposed business/company name (with 2–3 alternatives in case the first choice is unavailable).

•    Business premises address and, where applicable, a lease agreement or letter of premises ownership.

•    For a company: Memorandum and Articles of Association.

•   For a cooperative: member register and society bylaws.

Practical Exercise / Case Study

Case Study: Choosing the Right Registration Structure

Present the cohort with three short enterprise scenarios (adapt to real examples from the room where possible): (1) a single-owner briquette maker just starting out; (2) a five-year-old pellet enterprise with two co-owners seeking a bank loan; (3) a group of eight farmers wanting to jointly process bioethanol feedstock. In small groups, participants:

1.    Match each scenario to the most appropriate registration type from the table above, and justify the choice.

2.    List the specific documents each scenario's owners would need to gather before applying.

3.    Identify which scenario(s) would also need to consider VAT registration, and why.

4.    Identify which scenario(s) should register with NITA, and why.

5.    Report back in plenary; the facilitator confirms against the registration-type table.

Key Takeaways

•    The right registration structure depends on ownership, liability tolerance, and future finance/contracting needs - not on cost alone.

•    A KRA PIN unlocks nearly every other compliance and finance step, so it should be obtained immediately after registration.

•    VAT registration is mandatory above the statutory turnover threshold but can be chosen voluntarily below it to reclaim input VAT.

•    NITA registration formalises an enterprise's role in training apprentices and staff, and is a compliance step many enterprises overlook.

Resources / Tools

•    eCitizen Business Registration Service (BRS) portal access, for live demonstration where internet is available.

•    Document checklist handout (above), for participants to complete for their own enterprise.

•    Compliance pathway one-pagers (Annex D).

Assessment Questions

Use these questions (orally or written) to check whether the learning outcomes above have been achieved before closing the session:

1.    Name the four types of business registration available in Kenya and one enterprise type best suited to each.

2.    List the six steps to register a business name or company, in order.

3.    At what point does VAT registration become mandatory, and can an enterprise register voluntarily before that point?

4.    Which enterprises should register with NITA, and what does that registration formalise?

5.    List the documents your own enterprise would need to gather to complete or update its registration.

Fuel-Specific Compliance Pathways

Each of the following four short sessions applies the general registration foundation above to one fuel stream. Trainers should deliver only the session matching the cohort's primary fuel stream, using the pathway as a checklist participants complete for their own enterprise.

5.2 Session: Biomass Pellets: Compliance Pathway

 

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this session, participants will be able to:

1.    Identify the KEBS, NEMA, and county approvals required for a biomass pellet or briquette enterprise.

2.    Apply the correct product labelling requirements to a sample finished product.

3.    Assess their own enterprise's current compliance status against the pathway checklist.

Session Overview

Biomass pellet and briquette manufacturers face a shorter compliance pathway than bioethanol producers, but skipping any one step still blocks access to institutional and export buyers, who consistently ask for KEBS-marked product.

Session Content

•    KEBS Kenya Standard for solid biofuels (pellet/briquette specification) moisture, calorific value, ash content thresholds as covered in Session 3.1.

•    NEMA registration/EIA licence where production scale requires it (see Session 2.2).

•    County health and fire-safety approval for the production premises.

•    Product labelling: net weight, production date, manufacturer details, and the KEBS mark once certified.

KS 2912:2020 sets seven measurable parameters, applied separately to sustainable charcoal and to carbonized briquettes, since the two products have different physical structures and are not held to identical thresholds:

 

A 2020 SNV Netherlands study found that only 35% of surveyed briquette manufacturers labelled their products at all, and none of those carried a genuine KEBS mark - labels covered only manufacturer name and package weight. This is the clearest evidence in the sector for why labelling and certification matter commercially, not just legally: unlabelled product cannot access institutional or export buyers regardless of its actual quality. CCAK's own Clean Cooking Entrepreneurs Training Manual (Section 14.1.4) supplements KS 2912:2020 with a fuller compliance framework covering raw-material quality, binder composition, emissions limits, packaging/labelling, storage/handling, and traceability - facilitators with access to that manual should draw on it directly for this session.

 

Practical Exercise / Case Study

Checklist Walk-Through

Participants complete the pathway checklist for their own enterprise, marking each item Done / In progress / Not started:

1.    KEBS product testing initiated or completed for the applicable standard.

2.    NEMA registration status confirmed (registered / EIA licence obtained where required / not yet started).

3.    County health and fire-safety approval obtained for the current production premises.

4.    Product labels reviewed against the four labelling requirements above.

Key Takeaways

•    Product labelling is a compliance requirement, not a marketing choice - all four elements must be present.

•    NEMA requirements scale with production volume; confirm your enterprise's threshold status rather than assuming exemption.

Resources / Tools

•    Biomass compliance pathway one-pager (Annex D).

•    Session 3.1 quality parameters, for cross-reference.

Assessment Questions

Use these questions (orally or written) to check whether the learning outcomes above have been achieved before closing the session:

1.    List the four compliance requirements in the biomass pellets pathway.

2.    What four elements must appear on a compliant product label?

3.    What is your enterprise's current status against each item in the pathway checklist?

5.3 Session: Biogas: Compliance Pathway

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this session, participants will be able to:

4.    Identify the KEBS/KIRDI, NEMA, and county approvals required for a biogas installation enterprise.

5.    Explain what commissioning documentation must be produced after every installation.

6.    Assess their own enterprise's current compliance status against the pathway checklist.

Session Overview

Biogas installers carry a compliance responsibility that extends beyond their own premises to every site they install at — commissioning documentation is what protects both the installer and the client if a dispute or safety issue arises later.

Session Content

•    KEBS/KIRDI digester design and installation guidelines, where applicable to the digester type (Session 3.2).

•    NEMA approval for waste-handling and slurry management, particularly for institutional or commercial-scale digesters.

•    County approval for any excavation or construction work associated with fixed-dome installation.

•    After-installation commissioning documentation, confirming gas yield and leak-tightness testing (Session 3.2).

Two Kenya Standards apply depending on scale: KS 2566-2:2015 for domestic fixed-dome digesters, and KS 2951:2022 for farm and industrial-scale digesters. Note for facilitators: unlike the bioethanol and biomass standards above, only the titles and scope of these two standards were confirmed at the time of writing this manual -the full parameter text was not available for reproduction here. Facilitators should obtain the current full standard text directly from KEBS or KIRDI before teaching this session in detail, and treat the design/installation and NEMA/county steps below as the operative compliance framework in the meantime.

Practical Exercise / Case Study

Checklist Walk-Through

Participants complete the pathway checklist for a recent installation:

1.    Digester design confirmed against KEBS/KIRDI guidance for the digester type installed.

2.    NEMA waste-handling approval status confirmed for the scale of installation.

3.    County excavation/construction approval obtained where fixed-dome construction was involved.

4.    Commissioning record completed, including gas-yield and leak-tightness results.

Key Takeaways

•    Commissioning documentation is not paperwork for its own sake — it is the installer's evidence of a safe, compliant handover.

•    NEMA approval requirements scale with the size and setting (household vs institutional/commercial) of the installation.

Resources / Tools

•    Biogas compliance pathway one-pager (Annex D).

•    Commissioning record template.

Assessment Questions

Use these questions (orally or written) to check whether the learning outcomes above have been achieved before closing the session:

1.    List the four compliance requirements in the biogas pathway.

2.    What must a commissioning record confirm before handover to a client?

3.    When is NEMA waste-handling approval most likely to be required?

5.4 Session: Bioethanol: Compliance Pathway

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this session, participants will be able to:

1.    Identify the KEBS, KRA excise, NEMA, and EPRA requirements that apply to bioethanol manufacturing.

2.    Explain why denaturing compliance is treated as a critical control point in this pathway.

3.    Assess their own enterprise's current compliance status against the pathway checklist.

Session Overview

Bioethanol carries the most demanding compliance pathway of the four fuel streams because it is a controlled, excisable, and flammable product this session treats KRA excise and denaturing compliance as the anchor of the whole pathway, not an afterthought.

Session Content

•    KEBS fuel-grade ethanol specification and container/labelling standards, including hazard symbols and child-resistant packaging (Session 3.3).

•    KRA excise licensing and denaturing compliance critical, since ethanol is a controlled and excisable product.

•    NEMA approval for fermentation and distillation waste (stillage) management.

•    EPRA engagement where the enterprise operates as a fuel distributor as well as a manufacturer.

KS 2838:2019 is the in-force, complete, test-ready specification for cooking/appliance-fuel ethanol, with ten measurable chemical/physical parameters, each with a named test method:

 

Mandatory labelling elements under KS 2838:2019 Clause 8 - a common compliance-failure point and a strong training focus are: product name; manufacturer's name and address; net contents; name(s) of denaturant(s) used; batch/lot number; minimum ethanol content; year of manufacture; country of origin; and the mandatory warning words “highly poisonous” and “highly flammable.” Packaging must use safe, suitable containers that do not impart foreign substances or odours to the product.

Scope boundary — do not mix these two standards: KS 2838:2019 governs household cooking/appliance-fuel ethanol and is what this manual trains against. DKS 2041:2026 (draft, replacing KS 2041:2008) governs a separate, broader industrial/chemical/pharmaceutical/cosmetic-use category, with nine denaturant grades under a different recipe table, and several cells in that draft are still marked “TBD” (incomplete) at the time of writing. Critically, several DKS 2041 denaturants including kerosene petroleum oil and crude pyridine  are unsafe in a fuel intended for indoor household cooking.A manufacturer producing cooking-fuel ethanol should always be trained and tested against KS 2838:2019, never against DKS 2041, regardless of which standard a supplier or informal source may reference.

 

Practical Exercise / Case Study

Checklist Walk-Through

Participants complete the pathway checklist for their own enterprise:

1.    KRA excise licence status confirmed and denaturing process verified as compliant.

2.    KEBS labelling checked against hazard-symbol and child-resistant packaging requirements.

3.    NEMA stillage/waste management approval status confirmed.

4.    EPRA engagement status confirmed, if the enterprise also distributes fuel.

Key Takeaways

•    Denaturing and excise compliance sit at the centre of this pathway  production cannot legally proceed at commercial scale without them.

•    EPRA engagement applies specifically to enterprises that distribute, not only manufacture, fuel.

Resources / Tools

•    Bioethanol compliance pathway one-pager (Annex D).

•    KRA excise and denaturing guidance reference.

Assessment Questions

Use these questions (orally or written) to check whether the learning outcomes above have been achieved before closing the session:

1.    Why is bioethanol treated as a controlled and excisable product, and which regulator manages this?

2.    List the four compliance requirements in the bioethanol pathway.

3.    When does EPRA engagement become relevant for a bioethanol manufacturer?

5.5 Session: Electric Cooking: Compliance Pathway

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this session, participants will be able to:

1.    Identify the KEBS electrical safety and energy-labelling requirements that apply to assembled electric cooking appliances.

2.    Explain when EPRA engagement applies to an electric cooking appliance enterprise.

3.    Assess their own enterprise's current compliance status against the pathway checklist.

Session Overview

This pathway applies equally to enterprises assembling electric pressure cookers and those assembling non-hybrid appliances such as rice cookers and ugali makers (Session 3.4) - the electrical safety standard does not distinguish by appliance category.

Session Content

•    KEBS electrical appliance safety standard (earthing, insulation, overcurrent protection) as covered in Session 3.4.

•    Energy performance/efficiency labelling requirements where applicable.

•    EPRA engagement for enterprises involved in appliance import, distribution, or PAYG-linked energy service models.

Two standards apply: KS IEC 60335-1 for household electrical appliance general safety (earthing, insulation, overcurrent protection - covered in Part 3.4), and KS IEC 60350-1/-2 for electric cooking appliance performance. Facilitators should flag an important limitation to participants: KS IEC 60350 is documented as outdated for newer EPC and induction-cooker technology, and KEBS laboratory testing currently covers electrical safety only, not full performance verification, for these appliance types. This means a KEBS safety mark confirms the appliance is safe to use, but does not yet independently confirm the manufacturer's performance or efficiency claims -participants should not present performance figures to buyers as KEBS-verified unless that is actually true.

Practical Exercise / Case Study

Checklist Walk-Through

Participants complete the pathway checklist for their own enterprise:

1.    KEBS electrical safety testing status confirmed for each appliance category assembled, including non-hybrid appliances.

2.    Energy-efficiency labelling reviewed for accuracy against tested performance.

3.    EPRA engagement status confirmed, where the enterprise imports, distributes, or offers PAYG-linked services.

Key Takeaways

•    Electrical safety compliance applies equally to hybrid and non-hybrid appliance categories - there is no simplified pathway for simpler appliances.

•    EPRA engagement is triggered by distribution or PAYG activity, not by manufacturing/assembly alone.

Resources / Tools

•    Electric cooking compliance pathway one-pager (Annex D).

Assessment Questions

Use these questions (orally or written) to check whether the learning outcomes above have been achieved before closing the session:

1.    List the three compliance requirements in the electric cooking pathway.

2.    Does the electrical safety standard differ between a pressure cooker and a rice cooker? Explain.

3.    When does EPRA engagement apply to an electric cooking appliance enterprise?

5.6 Session: Certification and Labelling: The KEBS Pathway

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this session, participants will be able to:

1.    Explain the six-step process for applying for and obtaining KEBS certification.

2.    Identify the barriers most commonly reported by manufacturers not yet certified, and a mitigation for each.

3.    Assemble the document and sample package required to submit a KEBS application for their own product.

Session Overview

KEBS certification is roughly evenly split between fully certified (40%), not certified (40%), and in-progress (20%) manufacturers (KII, n=10)  meaning most of any cohort will either be starting this pathway or partway through it. This session pairs the formal process with the practical barriers manufacturers actually reports, so participants leave with a plan to overcome their specific barrier, not just a description of the process.

Session Content

Each barrier above was cited by a broadly equal share of non-certified respondents in the KII sample, indicating that no single obstacle dominates a mix of distance, cost, process clarity, and documentation readiness must all be addressed together, which is why this session is paired with the record-keeping and registration sessions in Part 4 and Session 5.1 rather than treated as a standalone technical topic.

Applying for KEBS certification: the process

1.    Confirm the applicable Kenya Standard (KS) for your product category (see Part 3 quality parameters for each fuel).

2.    Prepare product samples and supporting documentation (business registration, production process description, quality-control records).

3.    Submit an application to KEBS, including the applicable testing fee.

4.    Product testing at a KEBS or KEBS-recognised laboratory (e.g. KIRDI for biomass/cookstove testing).

5.    Factory/premises inspection, where required for the certification scheme.

6.    Certificate issuance and permit to use the KEBS Diamond Mark or Standardisation Mark, subject to ongoing surveillance testing.

Practical Exercise / Case Study

Exercise: Assemble Your Application Package

Using the document checklist from Session 5.1 and their own enterprise's records, participants:

1.    Confirm the applicable Kenya Standard for their product.

2.    List every document and sample they would need to submit, marking each Have / Need to obtain.

3.    Identify their single biggest barrier from the table above and their planned mitigation.

4.    Add the certification application as a dated item on their Enterprise Action Plan.

Key Takeaways

•    Certification readiness is built well before the application step, through registration (5.1) and record-keeping (4.4) not assembled at the last minute.

•    No single barrier dominates; most manufacturers face a combination of distance, cost, process clarity, and documentation gaps.

•    The KEBS Diamond Mark or Standardisation Mark is subject to ongoing surveillance testing, not a one-time achievement.

Resources / Tools

•    Current KEBS fee schedule and application forms (where available, brought by a KEBS/KIRDI co-facilitator).

•    Session 5.1 document checklist.

•    Enterprise Action Plan template (Annex C1).

Assessment Questions

Use these questions (orally or written) to check whether the learning outcomes above have been achieved before closing the session:

1.    List the six steps of the KEBS certification process in order.

2.    Name the four most commonly cited barriers to certification and one mitigation for each.

3.    What documentation and samples would you need to submit for your own product?

4.    What is the KEBS Diamond Mark, and what ongoing obligation comes with holding it?

5.7 Legal Frameworks and Interventions (Cross-Cutting)

Manufacturers should leave this part of the training able to name, at minimum, the regulator responsible for each area of their compliance obligation:

PART 6:PRACTICAL GUIDES

6.1 Facilitator Guide

Trainers delivering this manual are expected to be practitioners familiar with at least one clean cooking fuel stream, comfortable facilitating adult, enterprise-level learners, and consistent in applying GEDSI principles throughout delivery. The guidance below is organised around three phases common to every session: Prepare, Deliver, and Evaluate.

Prepare

•    Read the full session, including Session Content and the Practical Exercise/Case Study, before the training date. Identify sections requiring specialised technical knowledge (e.g. digester sizing, ethanol distillation ratios) and arrange a co-facilitator or technical resource person if this falls outside your own expertise.

•    Confirm the fuel-stream composition of the participant group in advance. Mixed groups require sequencing sessions so each participant's core stream is covered, using breakout groups for stream-specific technical content.

•    Gather all required materials: sample products (pellets, briquettes, ethanol test kits, appliance components), compliance document templates, and the visual aids referenced in each session (see 6.3, below).

•    Confirm the training venue is accessible to participants with mobility, visual, or hearing impairments, and that materials are available in Kiswahili or the relevant local language where needed.

•   Contact the relevant KEBS, NEMA, EPRA, or county officer in advance if a compliance session will benefit from their direct input or a site visit.

Deliver

•    Open each session by reading out the Learning Outcomes and connecting them to participants' existing enterprise operations, not as new theory but as a refinement of what they may already be doing informally.

•    Use the DACUM Duty–Task Chart (Part 2.1) to keep technical sessions anchored in real manufacturing tasks rather than abstract descriptions.

•    Follow each session's structure in order  Learning Outcomes, Session Overview, Session Content, Practical Exercise/Case Study, Key Takeaways  alternating short input (15–20 minutes maximum) with practical work and discussion. Avoid uninterrupted lecture beyond 20 minutes.

•    Apply the GEDSI facilitation principles consistently: rotate speaking opportunities, use inclusive language, ensure physical accessibility of any demonstration, and actively invite women, youth, and persons with disabilities to lead parts of exercises.

•    Where safety is involved (chemical handling in ethanol production, digester gas pressure, electrical assembly), always demonstrate the correct PPE and safe procedure before allowing participants to practise.

•    Record attendance, and note any participant needing additional follow-up (technical gaps, literacy support, accessibility accommodation) for the mentor.

Evaluate

•    Close every session with its Assessment Questions, used orally or in writing to confirm the Learning Outcomes were met.

•    Administer the module quiz (Annex B2) at the close of each module, per the criteria set out in Part 2.3.

•    Use the standard post-session feedback form (Annex B4) to capture participant ratings of clarity, relevance, and pace, and note any content gaps for the next revision cycle.

•    Submit assessment results and attendance records to the CCAK county focal point within 48 hours of each training day.

•    Schedule the first mentorship follow-up visits within 30 days of module completion (see Part 8).

•    At the end of the full cohort, administer the Manual Effectiveness Evaluation (Annex B5) to capture feedback on the manual itself, not only on individual sessions.

6.2 Practical Exercises

This section consolidates every hands-on exercise referenced across the manual into one facilitator-ready set, so trainers can prepare materials in advance regardless of which module they are delivering. Each session's own Practical Exercise/Case Study gives the full instructions; this section is the quick-reference index.

Exercise 1 — DACUM Task-Mapping (use with Part 2.1)

1.    Give each participant a set of small cards, each listing one Task from the DACUM chart (Part 2.1).

2.    Ask participants to sort the cards into three piles: 'I do this confidently', 'I do this but inconsistently', and 'I rarely or never do this'.

3.    In plenary, tally which tasks fall most often into the 'rarely or never' pile — this becomes the emphasis list for the rest of the cohort.

Exercise 2 — Enterprise Self-Assessment (use with Session 4.1)

1.    In pairs, score your enterprise 1–5 on: production consistency, quality control, record-keeping, market reach, workforce inclusion.

2.    Identify the lowest-scoring dimension.

3.    Write one specific action to improve it in the next 90 days and add it to your Enterprise Action Plan (Annex C1).

Exercise 3 — Costing Worksheet (use with Session 4.3)

1.    Using your own enterprise's most recent production batch, list every cost item (feedstock, labour, energy, packaging, depreciation).

2.    Calculate total cost per unit and compare it against your current selling price.

3.    If your margin is below 15%, identify one cost item you could reduce or one efficiency gain (see Part 3 quality/process notes) that would restore a healthy margin.

Exercise 4 — Draw Your Market System (use with Session 4.5)

1.    On flip-chart paper, sketch your core market (suppliers, your enterprise, your buyers), your supporting functions, and the rules that affect you, following the structure of Figure 4.2.

2.    Complete a short stakeholder analysis for your two or three most influential stakeholders.

3.    Identify one weak link in the map and one specific action to strengthen it.

4.    Share with the group and add the action to your Enterprise Action Plan.

Exercise 5 — Quality Control Walk-Through (use with Part 3, any fuel stream)

1.    Using a real or sample production batch, walk through each quality-control checkpoint identified in the relevant Part 3 session (e.g. moisture content for pellets, ethanol purity for bioethanol).

2.    Record a pass/fail result for each checkpoint on a simple QC log sheet.

3.    Discuss what corrective action would be taken for any 'fail' result, before it reaches a customer.

Exercise 6 — Inclusive Enterprise Audit (use with Part 7)

1.    List all current roles in the enterprise and who holds each one, by gender and approximate age group.

2.    Identify any role from which a person with a disability would currently be excluded, and why (physical access, assumption, or genuine task requirement).

3.    Identify one specific, low-cost action the enterprise can take in the next 90 days to improve inclusion in one of the four GEDSI dimensions.

4.    Share the identified action with the group and record it in the Enterprise Action Plan, to be reviewed at the first mentorship visit.

6.3 Visual Learning Materials

This manual embeds diagrams and data visuals at the point of use, rather than collecting them in a separate poster pack, so that trainers using the printed manual in the field always have the visual on the same page as the explanation. The full set of visuals used across the manual is indexed below for quick reference and for reproduction as stand-alone posters were useful.  

6.4 User Manual: Training End-Users

Manufacturers do not only produce fuel -many also train the distributors, retailers, and household or institutional end-users who will use it. Poor end-user training is a common cause of product complaints that are, in fact, misuse rather than manufacturing defects. This section is written so a manufacturer can extract it and use it directly as a short, standalone user-facing guide.

6.4.1 Training users on biomass pellets

•    Store pellets/briquettes in a dry place, off the ground, away from direct rain exposure.

•    Use only in a stove designed for the product (gasifier or pellet stove) do not substitute for charcoal-stove designs without confirming compatibility.

•    Light and feed the stove according to the manufacturer's quick-start instructions provided with the product.

6.4.2 Training users on biogas

•    Feed the digester consistently, at the volume and frequency specified at installation - irregular feeding reduces gas yield.

•    Check the water trap regularly and never ignore a persistent gas smell - this indicates a leak requiring immediate installer follow-up.

•    Where a shared or metered connection is in place, confirm meter readings periodically with the operator to avoid billing disputes.

•    Use the bio-slurry by-product as fertiliser only after basic settling/hygiene precautions.

6.4.3 Training users on bioethanol

•    Store fuel in the original, sealed, labelled container, away from open flame and out of reach of children.

•    Never refill a hot or lit stove — allow it to cool completely before adding fuel.

•    Use only in a stove designed for ethanol/gel fuel; report any unusual flame colour or smell to the manufacturer.

6.4.4 Training users on electric cooking

•    Confirm the appliance is used on a stable, properly earthed power supply appropriate to its rated wattage.

•    Avoid overloading a single circuit with multiple high-wattage appliances.

•    For non-hybrid appliances such as rice cookers and ugali makers, follow the automatic cut-off/keep-warm indicators where fitted, and avoid forcing the lid open during a pressurised or heating cycle.

•    Report any damaged cord, plug, or housing immediately, and stop use until repaired or replaced.

6.4.5 Designing an effective user training session

•    Keep it short (20–30 minutes) and always hands-on demonstrate, then have the user repeat the action themselves.

•    Use the local language and simple, consistent terms; avoid technical jargon carried over from the manufacturer's own training.

•    Leave a simple printed or pictorial quick-reference card with every unit sold.

•    Record who has been trained (for after-sales follow-up and warranty purposes) this is also a useful early-warning system for product issues.

 

PART 7:GENDER EQUALITY, DISABILITY AND SOCIAL INCLUSION (GEDSI)

GEDSI is a standalone training module in this manual, delivered as its own dedicated session rather than folded into other content while its principles (inclusive facilitation, accessible venues, non-discriminatory practice) are also applied throughout every other part, GEDSI as a subject in its own right deserves focused, in-depth teaching time, because it is one of the newer and less well-understood areas for many cohorts and requires deliberate explanation of what it is and how it works before participants can apply it to their own enterprises.

7.1 Session: Gender Equality, Disability and Social Inclusion (GEDSI)

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this session, participants will be able to:

1.    Explain what GEDSI means and why it is treated as a specific, addressable business practice rather than a goodwill gesture.

2.    Identify the four GEDSI dimensions and at least two practical actions an enterprise can take under each.

3.    Analyse their own enterprise's current workforce and governance practice against the four GEDSI dimensions.

4.    Apply GEDSI principles to draft a written enterprise policy or bylaw amendment on equal pay, non-discriminatory hiring, and reasonable accommodation.

5.    Develop a dated, low-cost GEDSI action for their Enterprise Action Plan through the Inclusive Enterprise Audit exercise.

 

Session Overview

The evidence gathered for this manual shows a sector where women's leadership is already strong at the enterprise level directly consulted all ten KII enterprises report women in leadership or ownership roles, and women make up an estimated 35.6% of employees on average across those enterprises  yet the wider 116-firm baseline survey shows persistent structural gaps: enterprise ownership nationally remains 70.5% male, and women's leadership does not reliably translate into technical roles. Persons with disabilities are often excluded from production roles by default, through inaccessible facilities or unexamined assumptions about capability, rather than through any genuine task limitation. This session exists to turn that evidence into practical, structural changes an enterprise can make

Session Content

What is GEDSI, and how does it work?

GEDSI stands for Gender Equality, Disability and Social Inclusion. It is a framework for identifying and removing the specific barriers that prevent particular groups  women, persons with disabilities, youth, and socially marginalised community members from participating fully and fairly in an enterprise, whether as workers, leaders, suppliers, or customers. GEDSI works by asking a simple, repeatable question at every business decision: 'Does this decision, policy, or practice create an unnecessary barrier for any of these groups, and if so, what specific, low-cost change would remove it?'

GEDSI is not a request for goodwill or charity. In this sector, the evidence is specific: access to capital, not skill or willingness, is the binding constraint on women's participation (see Figure 7.1 below). That reframes GEDSI from an abstract value into a concrete operational fix  the same discipline a manufacturer already applies to diagnosing a production defect (Session 3.1) or a compliance gap (Part 5) applies equally to a participation gap.

How GEDSI works in practice: four dimensions

GEDSI is organised into four dimensions. Each dimension has its own typical barriers and its own practical, low-cost actions an enterprise can take this structure is what makes GEDSI usable rather than aspirational.

 

This single finding that access to capital, not skill or willingness, is the binding constraint on women's participation should shape how trainers and participants talk about GEDSI throughout this session: not as a request for goodwill, but as a specific, addressable financial and structural barrier that links directly back to Session 4.2 (Financial Literacy).

What manufacturers report about their own workforce (KII, n=10)

Embedding GEDSI into enterprise governance

•    For cooperative or group-owned enterprises: bylaws should explicitly allow women, youth, and persons with disabilities to hold any leadership position, with a minimum representation target (commonly 40% for gender balance and a designated youth seat).

•    For owner-managed enterprises: adopt a simple written policy on equal pay, non-discriminatory hiring, and reasonable accommodation for staff with disabilities.

•    Track basic GEDSI indicators alongside production and financial records: staff composition by gender, age, and disability status; leadership composition; and access to training and finance opportunities within the enterprise.

Practical Exercise / Case Study

Exercise 6 — Inclusive Enterprise Audit

Working individually or in pairs from the same enterprise, participants complete a structured, time-boxed audit of their own enterprise:

1.    List all current roles in the enterprise and who holds each one, by gender and approximate age group.

2.    Identify any role from which a person with a disability would currently be excluded, and state why: physical access, unexamined assumption, or genuine task requirement.

3.    Review current pay practice for evidence of equal pay for equal work across roles.

4.    For cooperative/group enterprises: review bylaws for explicit provisions on gender, youth, and disability representation in leadership; for owner-managed enterprises: check whether a written policy exists on equal pay and reasonable accommodation.

5.    Identify one specific, low-cost action the enterprise can take in the next 90 days to improve inclusion in one of the four GEDSI dimensions.

6.    Share the identified action with the group and record it in the Enterprise Action Plan, to be reviewed at the first mentorship visit (Part 8).

Key Takeaways

•    GEDSI is a repeatable diagnostic question  'does this create an unnecessary barrier, and what specific fix removes it?' -applied to gender, disability, youth, and social inclusion.

•    In this sector, the evidence points to access to capital, not skill or willingness, as the binding constraint on women's participation -GEDSI action should target that specific barrier.

•    Each of the four GEDSI dimensions has its own typical barrier and its own low-cost, practical fix; enterprises do not need a large budget to make meaningful progress.

•    GEDSI should be written into governance (bylaws or a simple policy) and tracked with basic indicators, not left as an informal intention.

Resources / Tools

•    Inclusive Enterprise Audit worksheet (Annex D handout, matching this exercise).

•    Sample cooperative bylaw language on gender/youth/disability representation.

•    Sample owner-managed enterprise policy template on equal pay and reasonable accommodation.

•    Enterprise Action Plan template (Annex C1).

Assessment Questions

Use these questions (orally or written) to check whether the learning outcomes above have been achieved before closing the session:

1.    In your own words, what does GEDSI mean, and what question does it ask about any business decision?

2.    Name the four GEDSI dimensions and one practical action for each.

3.    According to Figure 7.1, what is the single most cited barrier to women's participation in this sector, and why does that matter for how GEDSI is discussed?

4.    What is the difference between the KII findings and the baseline survey findings on enterprise ownership, and why should trainers present both?

5.    What GEDSI action did your Inclusive Enterprise Audit identify for your own enterprise, and by when will you complete it?

 

PART 8:POST-TRAINING FOLLOW-UP

Training alone rarely changes practice; it is training combined with structured follow-up that converts knowledge into consistent, compliant, inclusive production. This part sets out how CCAK and ELMECC mentors follow up after training ends, and is deliberately kept separate from Part 7 (GEDSI) so that each is delivered and assessed as its own distinct module, in line with the accreditation-ready structure of this manual.

8.1 The Mentorship Cycle

Every training cohort is paired with a CCAK-assigned or ELMECC county mentor responsible for at least three follow-up visits per enterprise over the six months following training. Manufacturers directly asked for exactly this kind of follow-up: when asked what would make training more inclusive and effective, respondents specifically requested site visits for practical lessons, personalised training rather than one-size-fits-all sessions, and trainers who are themselves practising entrepreneurs rather than pure theorists all of which the mentorship cycle below is designed to deliver.

Mentors use the Mentorship Field Visit Log (Annex C2) at every visit and submit completed logs to CCAK within 48 hours. Where an enterprise cannot demonstrate progress against its Action Plan by Visit 2, the mentor escalates to the CCAK county focal point to arrange targeted additional support rather than waiting until Visit 3.

8.2 What Manufacturers Asked For, In Their Own Words

The KII included an open question on what would make training more inclusive. Their answers should directly guide how trainers and mentors behave, not only what content is delivered:

•    Trainers that are entrepreneurs, so that training moves beyond theory and stays practical, with personalised training rather than assuming every enterprise has the same problem.

•    Bringing in experts from the regulatory bodies, and entrepreneurs from other regions to exchange ideas on what they are doing.

•    Site visits for practical lessons.

•    A sign-language video version of key training content to include deaf participants, and machines fitted with lights to indicate when they are running, to support deaf workers and general shop-floor safety awareness.

This last point is a concrete, low-cost accessibility action any manufacturer can act on immediately: visual (light) indicators on running equipment support both deaf workers and general shop-floor safety awareness, and should be raised explicitly during the Inclusive Enterprise Audit (Part 7, Exercise 6).

8.3 Assessment of Follow-Up Effectiveness

Mentors and the CCAK county focal point should periodically check follow-up effectiveness using the same discipline applied to training sessions themselves:

•    Has the enterprise closed the gap identified in its Enterprise Action Plan since the previous visit?

•    Has the enterprise progressed at least one step further on its compliance pathway (Part 5) since the previous visit?

•    Has the enterprise's GEDSI action (Part 7) been implemented, partially implemented, or not started?

•    Is the enterprise receiving a comparable quality and frequency of support to other enterprises in the same cohort, regardless of the owner's gender, age, or disability status?

B1. Pre-Training Diagnostic (5–10 questions, oral or written)

Administered before Part 1 to establish a baseline and inform trainer adaptation. Not scored pass/fail. Sample prompts: What clean cooking fuel(s) does your enterprise currently produce or plan to produce? What compliance certificates does your enterprise currently hold? Have you calculated a floor price for your product before? Does your enterprise have a written record-keeping system?

B2. Standard Module Quiz Template (10 questions)

Each module and fuel-specific session should be assessed using a 10-question quiz combining multiple-choice, short-answer, and scenario-based questions drawn directly from that session's Learning Outcomes and Assessment Questions. A minimum score of 6/10 is required to pass. Quizzes should be available in English and Kiswahili, and administered orally for participants with literacy barriers.

B4. Post-Session Feedback Form

•    How clear was the content of this session? (1–5 scale)

•    How relevant was this session to your enterprise? (1–5 scale)

•    Was the pace of delivery appropriate? (too fast / appropriate / too slow)

•    What is the one thing you will apply in your enterprise as a result of this session?

•   What, if anything, was unclear or should be covered in more depth?

B5. Manual Effectiveness Evaluation (end of full cohort)

Administered once, at the close of the full training cohort, to both participants and the facilitator. Unlike the per-session feedback form (B4), this evaluation rates the manual itself - its structure, clarity, and completeness — so that CCAK can continuously improve the curriculum for future cohorts and for accreditation review.

For participants

•    Overall, how clear and easy to follow was the training manual's content? (1–5 scale)

•    Did each session give you a clear sense of what you were expected to learn before it started? (Yes / Partially / No)

•    Which module or session was most useful to your enterprise, and why?

•    Which module or session, if any, needs more practical content, tools, or examples?

•    Did the practical exercises and case studies feel relevant to a real enterprise like yours? (1–5 scale)

•    How confident do you feel applying what you learned to your enterprise in the next 90 days? (1–5 scale)

•    What is missing from this manual that would have helped your enterprise?

For facilitators

•    Did the standard session structure (Learning Outcomes through Assessment Questions) make sessions easier to prepare and deliver consistently? (1–5 scale)

•    Were the stated Learning Outcomes for each session achievable within the stated Duration? (Yes / Mostly / No — specify session)

•    Which session(s) required content, examples, or technical depth beyond what the manual currently provides?

•    Were the Assessment Questions at the end of each session sufficient to confirm whether the Learning Outcomes were met?

•    Any recommendations for the next revision cycle of this manual?