Kenya: Demanding remedy and accountability for survivors of child sex abuse

Inclusive Development International first got involved in this case because we were appalled at the unprecedented attack on the independence of the CAO—a mechanism that has been instrumental in so many of our cases, where we are supporting communities harmed by IFC investments around the world to pursue remedy and accountability. We also saw an opportunity in the CAO process, despite its flaws, for survivors of abuse at Bridge schools to get redress. And we know that the way the World Bank board responds to this egregious case of Bank complicity in harm will set a precedent for whether and how it remediates harm in all future cases investigated by the CAO. 

After the damning allegations of abuse occurring at Bridge schools and IFC management’s interference in the case came to light, we worked with our global civil society partners to demand accountability from World Bank president Ajay Banga and the Bank’s board. We insisted on the full and unredacted disclosure of the CAO investigation report, and for IFC management to respond with a plan to provide meaningful remedy for the survivors in Kenya. We also called for an independent investigation of the cover-up and whistleblower protections for the compliance investigator who has faced retaliation for bringing these issues to light. We engaged with US Congressional leaders, who sent letters to the US Treasury Department and World Bank president echoing our demands. We helped secure coverage from the Financial Times and New York Times. And we collaborated with Accountability Counsel, Oxfam and local partners in Kenya to reach out to Bridge survivors and support them to communicate their remedy expectations directly to the World Bank board of directors. 

Following this high-profile attention to the case, which came as IFC management was developing its response to the investigation, the CAO report was finally published, in early 2024, alongside IFC’s action plan for addressing the CAO’s findings. 

World Bank president Banga wrote to bank staff the night before the report and plan were made public, acknowledging the IFC’s responsibility in this case, expressing his commitment to both support the survivors in Kenya and take steps to prevent abuse through the bank’s investment portfolio, and accepting our call for an independent, external investigation of the IFC management cover-up. The US Treasury Department (under the Biden Administration) and several other World Bank shareholders also took strong positions in favor of providing meaningful redress to the Bridge survivors, informed by robust consultations with the survivors themselves. 

IFC’s Management Action Plan was an improvement from earlier drafts, reflecting our call for assurances that survivors would be consulted on the design of the “remediation program” that IFC has committed to implement in Kenya. It was also the first time an IFC Management Action Plan, responding to a CAO investigation into harms caused by an IFC-financed project, has included a commitment to directly fund remedial actions. 

Despite these improvements, the IFC’s plan fails to include financial compensation for the devastating harms Bridge survivors suffered, in part due to IFC’s due diligence failures. Rather than working with Bridge International Academies to provide compensation and psychosocial support to the children who were abused while in the care of Bridge schools, as recommended by the CAO, the IFC proposes instead to fund “existing programs” that support survivors of sexual abuse in Kenya across the board. The only financial support that the IFC proposes to provide to survivors is reimbursement for expenses that would enable them to access these services—such as bus fare or lost wages—on a case-by-case basis.  

Inclusive Development International and our partners have engaged directly with the IFC team and UN implementing partners tasked with developing the remediation program, urging them to prioritize accessibility of services specifically for Bridge survivors. We also supported the survivors who submitted complaints to engage in the consultation for the design of the program, to ensure that the remedies they are seeking are in fact delivered through the program.   

In September 2025, the IFC formally approved and published the Gender Based Violence (GBV) and Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (CSEA) Response and Prevention Support Program, under which IFC will invest $12 million into Kenya’s existing GBV response and prevention ecosystem, strengthening the capacity of service providers throughout the country to deliver quality services to survivors. This program is a precedent-setting first of its kind for IFC. IDI is engaging with IFC to oversee its implementation.  

In April 2026, following significant pressure, IFC also agreed to provide “immediate support” to the four women who brought complaints to the CAO, represented by Inclusive Development International and our partners. Through this process, the survivors have been connected to a case manager and have begun receiving ongoing psychosocial support, support for further education opportunities, and economic empowerment services.  

While we welcomed President Banga heeding our call for an independent, external investigation of allegations of IFC management interference in the CAO investigation of IFC’s investments in Bridge International Academies and even wrote a letter to the World Bank Directors containing recommendations for the scope and design of the investigation, we have been disappointed by their refusal so far to publish the findings. We continue to call on the Board to ensure that the investigation report is made public and is followed up by recommendations designed to address apparent efforts to undermine the independence and integrity of the CAO, including related to the Bridge investigation, as well as the underlying, systemic problems that enabled IFC’s interference in this process. This includes the use of non-disclosure agreements, management’s participation in the selection process for the CAO Director General, the inadequate application of whistleblower protections at the World Bank Group, and IFC management’s interest in limiting CAO’s authority and ability to independently carry out its work. 

Inclusive Development International and our partners have also pursued accountability of the US Development Finance Corporation (DFC)’s financing of Bridge schools. In 2024, we and our partners supported the four Bridge survivors we represent to file complaints to the DFC’s Independent Accountability Mechanism, joining the IAM’s ongoing investigation as complainants. In March 2025, the IAM finalized its investigation report, determining that the complainants’ allegations of sexual abuse were substantiated, and that DFC contributed to the harms by failing to monitor and respond to child sexual abuse risks at Bridge schools. The report included recommendations for institutional reforms within DFC, and for remedy for the survivors.

Shockingly, the DFC’s Management Response—delayed for well over a year and developed without consultation with the survivors or their CSO representatives—failed to respond to the remedy-focused recommendations. Inclusive Development International and our partners are continuing to raise this with decision-makers both within DFC and its board of directors, as well as with US government officials, to ensure that DFC responds to the demands of the survivors.