End-Term Project Review – Increasing Police Accountability Through Law Enforcement Development in Kenya (DRL) Project At International Justice Mission

Ref: IJM/KFO/MERL/02/2022

1.0 Background Information

1.1 About IJM Kenya

International Justice Mission is a global organization that protects people in poverty from violence. IJM partners with local authorities in 33 offices across 24 countries to combat slavery, violence against women and children, and other forms of abuse against people who are poor. IJM works to rescue and restore victims, hold perpetrators accountable, and help strengthen Public Justice Systems. Started in 2001, IJM’s office in Kenya works to combat Police Abuse of Power (PAP) against people who are poor, as well as Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children (CSEC). IJM’s focus is to ensure the well-being of the victims of this crime, the swift conviction of the perpetrators, and transformation of Kenya’s Public Justice System to protect people living in poverty from violence

1.2 About the Project

In 2018, IJM-Kenya partnered with the U.S. Department of State Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL) to implement a two- year project (2018-2021) called Increasing Police Accountability Through Law Enforcement Development in Kenya. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic and other related challenges, the project was extended for another 2 years to end in March 2023. The goal of the project is to reduce arbitrary prosecutions of civilians and increase police accountability by strengthening the investigations and prosecution of cases of police misconduct.

The project is being implemented in collaboration with the Office of Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP), the Independent Policing Oversight Authority (IPOA), National Police Service (NPS) and the National Police Service-Internal Affairs Unit (IAU).

The project was informed by the high prevalence of cases of police misconduct at the time. A national level baseline study[1] conducted at the onset of this project established that prevalence of this misconduct was at 46.2%. The study covered 36 out of the 47 counties – sampled to represent the entire country both for the public household survey and case files reviews. These counties were selected to ensure that the old provinces (i.e. Nairobi, Coast, Nyanza, Western, Rift valley, Central, Eastern and North Eastern) and the IPOA‘s presence (regional offices) were adequately covered. In various community dialogue forums that were conducted across the country, communities decried the policing malpractices that had been witnessed among them. Some of the commonly cited forms of violations included arbitrary/wrongful arrests, murder, enforced disappearances, assault, extortion, harassment, among others. In addition to the foregoing, investigations and prosecutions were conducted in rushed and arbitrary manner that did not meet the standards of the rule of law.

1.2.1 Project’s Theory of Change

The project’s Theory of Change (ToC) is as follows:

The project will increase police accountability for misconduct (in the form of arbitrary arrests and extra judicial killings of civilians) by strengthening IPOA and IAU’s ability to conduct proper investigations & to institute disciplinary actions in cases of police misconduct, and by strengthening ODPP to secure prosecutions and convictions. Ensuring prosecutors effectively apply evidential and public interest tests in their Decision to Charge will serve as a means of police accountability by preventing arbitrary charges from proceeding to prosecution and demonstrating that police misconduct will not be tolerated by the justice system. Police accountability for misconduct is also increased by ensuring that the relevant authorities responsible for bringing abusive police to account (through investigating, prosecuting and disciplinary action) are further equipped and trained.

1.2.2 Project Goal and Objectives

The goal of the project is to prevent arbitrary prosecutions of civilians and increase police accountability by strengthening the investigation of police misconduct cases as well as institutionalizing the D2C guidelines in all the ODPP offices across the 47 counties. To achieve this goal, the project pursued the following 2 objectives:

1. Objective 1: Strengthen the evidentiary screen at the inception of criminal proceedings to prevent criminal proceedings being instituted where there is insufficient evidence.
2. Objective 2: Enhance the quality and frequency of investigations, prosecutions and discipline for police misconduct and Extra Judicial Killings.

1.2.3 Project Outcomes

The project had the following outcomes to achieve its objectives:

1. Outcome 1.1: Decision to Charge Policy operationalized and mainstreamed by the ODPP.
2. Outcome 2.1: ODPP’s Civil Rights Division is developed and strengthened as an effective unit for achieving police accountability.
3. Outcome 2.2: Communities impacted by PAP are empowered to pursue police accountability and reform through Justice Centers
4. Outcome 2.3: IPOA, IAU and NPS conduct more effective investigations of crimes committed by police officers.
5. Outcome 2.4: Cases of police killings are robustly and extensively documented, and statistics are successfully leveraged through advocacy and media engagement.

1.2.4 Project Activities

The project planned several activities under each outcome to realize its objectives. During the second phase, a total of 35 activities were rolled out, details of which are available in the Project Concept Note.

2.0 Purpose of the End-Term Review

This task is an end-term review that is intended to assess the extent to which the DRL project achieved its objectives and to provide insights on what needs to be improved post review, by similar interventions.

Fundamentally the review should analyze whether the project did enough to strengthen the criminal justice system with respect to application of Decision to Charge Guidelines to strengthen investigations and prosecutions as well as ensuring improved quality of investigations. The review is meant to evaluate how the project worked to strengthen the capacities of the ODPP, IPOA, DCI and IAU.

2.1 Specific Review Objectives

The end-term review will be required to address the following specific objectives:

1. To evaluate the extent to which the project achieved its outputs, outcomes and objectives.
2. To document the lessons can be learnt from the design and implementation of the project.
3. To outline any challenges that impeded the project from achieving its critical objectives.
4. To document any strategic and operational changes that were made to mitigate the challenges.
5. To evaluate whether the project implemented all the planned activities within the intended scope, budget, and time.
6. To evaluate whether the Theory of Change of the project held true for the project and whether the project assumptions were valid.
7. To examine whether other logical emergent needs/interventions arose to support realization of the 2 objectives (e.g. legislative, policy and administrative changes, etc)
8. To document any other Justice System Transformations/Milestones (intended or unintended; positive or negative) that the project achieved or influenced during its implementation.
9. To measure the prospects of sustainability of these interventions so far and what the project did to inhibit or facilitate the sustainability of the interventions.
10. The evaluate the extent to which the project resulted in changes in its intended outcomes and impact in comparison to the midterm review, and the extent to which the changes are attributable to the project interventions.

3.0 Methodology

This is a mixed method review process including both quantitative and qualitative data and using appropriate data triangulation methods and review of project reports to arrive at informed findings.

It is noteworthy that this review should be strongly grounded on the project Theory of Change as well as the approved performance monitoring indicators.

Recommended data collection methods could include but not limited to; detailed document reviews, monitoring data, in-depth interviews/individual interviews, Key Informant Interviews (KIIs), Focused Group Discussions (FGDs), among other viable methods. Some of the key stakeholders include; law enforcement officers, public prosecutors, criminal investigators, survivors or survivor networks, Social Justice Centers and the Missing Voices[2] .

The full description of the methodology to be provided by the consulting team should be coherent and comprehensive, highlighting data collection methods/approaches, detailed evaluation questions, data collection tools, sample population, sampling criteria and sampling frames, data analysis plans, mobile data collection and management plans, data collection team-training plan, data collection schedule, ethical considerations, and quality assurance measures.

3.1 Review Scope and Criteria

In terms of scope, the review will look at national level system transformations as demonstrated by changes in policies, and in policing and prosecutorial practices, covering the National Police Service, the ODPP, the IAU and the DCI. It will also highlight the differences or varying application of the Decision to charge guidelines across the regions, if any.

The review and reporting thereof should be structured alongside the 6 OECD-DAC[3] criteria, namely: Efficiency, Effectiveness, Relevance, Coherence, Impact and Sustainability.

3.2 Key Deliverables

Key deliverables under this assignment will include the following;

1. Inception Report: The inception report will detail the endline review purpose and objectives, methodology, logistics and work plan. The consultant will develop and share an inception report based on the template and guidance provided by IJM Kenya.
2. Weekly reports: During the field work period, the consulting team will regularly provide updates on progress of data collection highlighting any logistical or technical challenges that may require immediate mitigation.
3. Draft and Final Endline survey reports: The review report will be based on the outcomes of the field processes, project report reviews and outputs of qualitative and quantitative data analysis. The report is the primary product that will be used to communicate findings to the key program audiences. The report will be done based on the guidance and template provided by IJM Kenya and will cover such key components including executive summary, background, methodology, limitations, findings, lessons learned, conclusions/recommendations, references, and appendices.
4. PowerPoint Presentation: After receipt of an acceptable draft endline report, the consultants will be required to disseminate the survey findings to stakeholders for their input and feedback in a forum to be organized by IJM Kenya. The final report will thereafter be adapted after necessary reviews have been completed and presented for IJM and stakeholders’ feedback and validation.
5. Popular version of the survey report: A brief summary of this report not exceeding 20 pages, excluding any potentially procurement-sensitive information shall be submitted (also electronically, in English) for dissemination among partners and stakeholders.
6. Other study products to hand over to IJM Kenya at the end of the assignment shall include completed data collection and analysis plans; completed training modules/resources; completed data collection tools; submitted raw and cleaned data sets (both quantitative and qualitative) and analysis outputs.

3.3 Ethics, Norms and Standards.

This survey will be conducted in line with human subjects’ research guidelines in Kenya. IJM Kenya endeavors to adhere to established protocols for gathering informed consent, protecting anonymity, and identifying information, and ensuring ethical data collection—including from vulnerable populations.

3.3.1 Survey Authorization.

To ensure compliance with the required ethical standards, ethical review will be sought from a local Institutional Review Board (IRB) in Kenya prior to data collection. In addition, research approval will be sought from the National Commission for Science, Technology, and Innovation (NACOSTI).

3.3.2 Informed consent.

Interviewers will read a written consent statement, which will include detailed information about the study, objectives, risks, and benefits, and will emphasize voluntary participation. Respondents will be allowed to ask questions and will be assured of confidentiality before the interview continues. Respondents will indicate consent by appending a signature or a thumbprint on the consent form if they agreed to take part in the interview. The Computer Assisted Personal Interview (CAPI) program shall prompt interviewers to record whether the respondent consented to participate or not. Interviewers will then continue with the interview if the respondent provided consent.

3.3.3 Trauma Management.

Safety of respondents and research assistants during data collection will be given utmost priority. To reduce re-traumatization of PAP survivors, the survey team will be accompanied by officers/counsellors from local organizations who serve survivors to provide familiar faces during introductions, reduce tension and provide appropriate psycho-social support interventions in case of post-interview trauma. The counselors will also be present (within view or in a nearby room), but out of earshot. This will ensure that survivors feel safe and able to ask for help, while avoiding them biasing their responses (which may be more likely if counselors are in ear shot). IJM social workers will also be present to ensure trauma informed standards are upheld.

3.3.4 IJM safeguarding and data security policies.

The entire survey team including data collectors and consulting team will sign the IJM safeguarding and data security policies. Prior to signing, they will be taken through the policies to understand their contents. No children will be interviewed as part of the survey. Only PAP survivors aged 18 years and above will be allowed to participate in the survey or FGDs.

4.0 End-Term Review Timeframe.

The review exercise is intended to take no more than 30 working days. The assignment is expected to be conducted between February to March 2023. The consultant bidding for the assignment should give a clear breakdown of how the process will be undertaken and completed within the specified timeframe.

5.0 Reporting and Supervision.

The successful consultant will work under the supervision of the IJM-Kenya’s Senior Manager-Monitoring Evaluation Research and Learning (MERL) with close consultations with the Associate Director-Programs.

6.0 Qualification and Experience.

The prospective consultant/firm is expected to demonstrate a fulfillment of the following minimum qualifications:

1. Demonstrable, thorough knowledge of the Kenyan criminal justice system. This should include good knowledge of functions of the ODPP, National Police Service and the Directorate of Criminal Investigations. The lead consultant must have at least five years of professional experience in the Criminal Justice and Policy Sector.
2. Good mastery and experience of conducting program reviews within the governance and justice sectors in Kenya.
3. Excellent team management capacity, including appropriately qualified staff.
4. At least a Master’s degree (especially for lead consultant) in relevant discipline such as law, public policy, governance, human rights, or any other relevant field
5. Minimum of 5 years of demonstrated experience in conducting similar program reviews and evaluations using mixed methods. The application should include reports from 2 sample assignments conducted in the last 3 years.
6. Excellent report writing, analytical, communication skills and fluency in both English and Swahili are essential.

7.0 Application & Proposal Requirements.

Interested individual consultants and consultancy firms are encouraged to send their bids, which should include the following:

1. A letter of interest
2. A technical proposal (maximum of 10 pages) that summarizes the consultant’s interpretation of the RFP. The proposal should also have detailed timeline and activity schedule of implementation of the assignment. If a team is being proposed, the technical proposal should summarize the team composition and responsibilities of each member.
3. A copy of curriculum vitae (CV) of the lead consultant (and core team members, particularly the lead Subject Matter Expert and M&E Subject Matter Expert) which should outline their qualifications and relevant experience with respect to this assignment.
4. A financial proposal with a detailed breakdown of budget lines and costs (in Kenyan shillings) for conducting the review, including:

• Itemized Consultancy fees/costs
• Itemized field related and overhead expenses
• Related VAT costs

1. Two sample reports from similar assignments, conducted in the last 3 years: with 3 clear referees (names and contacts) from those assignments.
2. Up to date Certificate of Registration & Certificate of Tax compliance.

[1] Endline survey on policing standards and gaps in Kenya, IPOA, 2019

[2] Missing Voices is a coalition of organizations, IJM Kenya included, with a mission to shine light upon extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances, by providing detailed, undeniable data on each case documented.

[3] OECD-DAC evaluation criteria provides an overarching normative framework for intervention assessment and play a vital role in guiding the evaluation questions.