Jobs In Kenya

IJM Consultancy NGO Jobs in Kenya

1.0 Background

International Justice Mission is a global organization that protects people in poverty from violence. IJM partners with local authorities in 28 offices across 21 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 against people who are poor, as well as sexual violence against children. IJM’s focus is to ensure the well-being of the families affected by this crime, the swift conviction of all involved, and transformation of Kenya’s public justice system to protect people living in poverty from violence.

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 Covid 19 pandemic and other related challenges, the project has now been extended for another 2 years. The goal of the project is to reduce arbitrary prosecutions of civilians and increase police accountability by strengthening the investigations of cases of police misconduct.

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

The project was informed by the prevalence of cases of police misconduct at that time. A national level baseline study conducted at the onset of this project established that prevalence of this misconduct was which at the time was established to be 46.2%. 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 in such a way that did not meet the standards of the rule of law.

1.1 IJM Kenya’s Theory of Change

IJM’s theory of change in this project was as follows: The project will increase police accountability for misconduct (in the form of arbitrary prosecutions and extra judicial killings of civilians) by strengthening the capacity of the ODPP to prevent arbitrary felony convictions and by strengthening investigations, prosecutions and disciplinary actions in cases of police misconduct. Ensuring prosecutors effectively apply evidential and public interest tests in their decision to prosecute 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 Project Objectives

The project was designed to address two objectives and 3 outcomes. Objectives included;

1. Objective 1: Strengthen the evidentiary screen at the inception of criminal proceedings to prevent criminal proceedings being instituted where there is insufficient evidence.*

  1. Objective 2: Enhance the quality and frequency of investigations, prosecutions and discipline for police misconduct and Extra Judicial Killings.

The project had the following outcomes;

  1. Outcome 1.1: ODPP prosecutors consistently apply evidential and public interest tests in felony cases.
  2. Outcome 2.1: IPOA and IAU investigators conduct quality investigations of police misconduct cases and related crimes and recommend appropriate cases for prosecution.
  3. Outcome 2.2: Improved NPSC collaboration with the IG and Cabinet Secretary for the MOI on investigation of police misconduct and application of disciplinary action.

1.3 Project Activities

The following were the key activities that were implemented under the project;

  • Consultative sessions followed by regular meetings to ensure the buy-in of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP)
  • Development of the D2C guidelines for use by Public prosecutors
  • Develop training curriculum focused on use of the D2C form and pilot trainings for public prosecutors in key counties.
  • Replicate public prosecutor trainings across all counties.
  • Development of operations guidelines for use by all public prosecutors
  • Comprehensive investigations training for the Kenyan National Police Service Internal Affairs Unit (IAU) to include such topics as: relevant Kenyan law surrounding investigations and arrests/detention, investigative skills and tools (crime scene reconstruction, recording statements, evidence analysis, etc.), report writing, chain of custody and witness protection support.
  • Comprehensive investigations training for the Kenyan National Police Service Internal Affairs Unit (IAU)
  • Provide technical assistance and capacity building for IPOA through training and mentoring.
  • In collaboration with the NPSC, develop policy guidelines on how they can best interact with the Executive and Inspector General of the Police.

10. Carry out corresponding advocacy activities that draw attention to and increase political will behind the policy initiatives described above.**

2.0 Purpose of the Mid Term Review

The objective of IJM is to strengthen criminal justice systems for improved protection of persons who live in poverty. This is the overall context of IJM’s programming.

This task is a mid-term review that is intended to assess the extent to which the project can be considered to be on course on achieving its objectives and to provide insights on how the project can be improved post review.

Fundamentally the review should analyze whether the project is doing enough to strengthen the criminal justice system with respect to application of decision to chare principles to strengthen investigations and prosecutions as well as ensuring improved quality of investigations. The project particularly worked to strengthen capacities of the ODPP, IPOA, DCI and IAU.

2.1 Key Review Questions

The mid-term review will be required to answer the following key questions;

  • To what extent has the project strengthened the evidentiary screening at the inception of criminal proceedings to prevent criminal proceedings from being instituted where there is insufficient evidence? What are the critical milestones achieved so far?
  • To what extent has the project enhanced the quality of investigations, prosecutions and discipline for police misconduct and Extra Judicial Killings? What are the critical milestones achieved so far?
  • What other justice system transformations/milestones (intended or unintended; positive or negative) has the project achieved or influenced during the first half of its implementation?
  • To what extent did the project achieve its outputs? What proportion of the outputs have not been achieved, and are these outputs still relevant?
  • Has the project been implemented well, as per required quality and project timelines? What were the challenges to implementation?
  • What lessons can be learnt from the design and implementation of the project, as well as from the results achieved so far?
  • What challenges have impeded the project from achieving the above 2 critical objectives? What strategic and operational changes should be done to enable the project to better achieve the objectives?
  • Does the theory of change of the project still hold true for the project? Are the project assumptions still valid? Apart from the intervention packages captured in the initial design of the project, what other logical emergent needs/interventions can the project address to support realization of the 2 objectives? (e.g. legislative, policy and administrative changes, etc?)
  • What are the prospects of sustainability of these interventions so far? What does the project need to do to strengthen sustainability during the remaining period of the project?
  • What are the key stories of change either from survivors of Police Abuse of Power or from Prosecutors or Police Investigators which would testify that the project is transforming the criminal justice system positively?

3.0 Methodology

This is a mixed method review process. The review is expected to collect both quantitative and qualitative data and use appropriate data triangulation methods to arrive at informed review findings. The data should include success stories of change from the target groups/partners.

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 should include but not limited to; detailed document reviews, monitoring data, in-depth interviews, Stakeholder Analysis of change (STANCE), among other viable methods. Some of the key stakeholders include; law enforcement officers, public prosecutors, criminal investigators, survivors network and the missing voices platform).

The key questions of interest consist of the following;

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.

The review and reporting thereof should be structured alongside the OECD-DAC framework, which will look at the following dimensions: Efficiency, Effectiveness, Relevance and Sustainability (Too premature to look at impacts at this point). The above 10 questions provided should guide the review and report within this framework.

3.2 Key Deliverables

Key deliverables under this assignment will include the following;

  • Inception Report detailing the process to be undertaken in conducting the exercise. This should include the complete set of tools to be used for the review as well as stakeholder sampling. The inception report should be submitted within one week from the time of signing the contract.
  • Draft Mid Term Review Report, to be submitted not later than two weeks since completion of data collection. The report should be not more than 30 pages.
  • Datasets and transcripts based on the type of data collected.
  • Final Report, to be submitted not later than one week after validation meeting of the findings of the review, which will be presented to the IJM staff.
  • An extract analysis of lessons learnt and implications for programmatic changes in second phase of the project.
  • 3- 5 well analyzed stories of change from key project stakeholders, developed in accordance with the IJM story telling criteria.

3.3 Ethics, Norms and Standards

The review exercise must be conducted with integrity according to the international program evaluation standards, including; utility, feasibility, propriety and accuracy standards. In addition, the successful consultant(s) must consult appropriately with the IJM MERL dept and Senior Manager-Programs, to ensure that the conduct of this mid-term review meets the program evaluation framework of the IJM.

Finally, IJM is an organization that is driven by Christian values, and thus the review process must be conducted within Christian values and principles. The consultant (s) must also be aware of and practice acceptable ethical research standards, particularly causing no harm to evaluation respondents and subjects.**

3.4 Mid Term Review Timeframe

The review exercise is intended to take no more than 20 days. The assignment is expected to be conducted from mid-March to mid-April 2021. The consultant who is bidding for the assignment should give a clear breakdown of how the process will be undertaken and to be covered within the above specified timeframe.

3.5 Reporting and Supervision

The successful consultant will work under the supervision of the Senior MERL Manager-Kenya Program; but with close consultations with the Senior Programs Manager, Kenya.

4.0 Qualification and Experience

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

i) 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 worked in this sector for at least 5 years.

ii) Good mastery and experience of conducting program reviews within the governance and justice sector in Kenya.

iii) Excellent team management capacity, including appropriately qualified staff.

iv) At least a Master’s degree in relevant discipline such as law, public policy, governance, human rights, or any other relevant field (For lead consultant)

v) Minimum of 5 years of demonstrated experience in conducting similar program reviews or evaluations. The application should include reports from 2 sample assignments conducted in the last 5 years.

vi) Strong analytical and report writing skills;

Newsletter Updates

Enter your email address below to subscribe to our newsletter

Search For Jobs Offers in Kenya