The need to have good climate finance governance is becoming an essential requirement for realizing climate resilience and sustainable development, as the effects of climate change become more pronounced and requires response on the local government level. This paper offers a comparative assessment of subnational climate finance governance in Kenya and India based on their institutional designs, participatory frameworks, implementation schemes, and output outcomes. Employing comparative case study research design, the paper compares Kenya’s County Climate Change Fund (CCCF) and India’s urban climate finance programs (e.g., Smart Cities Mission) along four dimensions: legal and institutional structures, access and allocation institutions, governance performance, and technical capacity development. Data sources are policy papers, evaluation reports and academic literature, triangulated to reflect governance processes and results in both settings. The research finds that Kenya’s CCCF, under local law and community-based planning, has greater participation, disbursement of funds, and climate adaptation effect, while India’s efforts, although broader in coverage, are characterized by fragmentation, low climate emphasis, and poor institutional memory. The research highlights that the success of climate finance at the subnational level is not merely a function of fund size but also inclusive governance, regulatory clarity, and long-term capacity building. The chapter concludes with recommendations to governments, donors, and international climate funds for the strengthening of subnational climate finance systems worldwide.