Company Founded: Founded in 1998

PSS has three five outputs which include;

The capacity of local level CSO’s to address emerging conflicts and forestall violence enhanced.
Increased women engagement in leadership roles in peace and security in the engagement areas.
Collaboration between CSOs and government agencies in addressing conflicts and extremism enhanced.
Increased use of local information by relevant national and county government agencies to develop and implement coherent national security policies, action plans and strategies.
Strengthened evidence-based research informing policy frameworks and decision making to promote peace and stability.

A Mid Term Review (MTR) of the PSS project commissioned by DANIDA covering the period July 2016 – June 2018 identified a number of successes, lessons and gaps. Under output 5, (Strengthened evidence-based research informing policy frameworks and decision making to promote peace and stability), Act! committed to commission a number of studies to build the necessary evidence to inform development of policies required in addressing three types of conflicts (natural resource conflict; political violence; violent extremism) that PSS focuses on. This is because evidence is at the heart of PSS delivery; sound evidence is indeed a fundamental requirement of due process in justice administration, government, law enforcement agencies and programming. Empirical evidence is necessary to guide the execution of policies and programming to concentrate resources where they are most needed as well as to assess the performance of the multiple actors of the process. Sound evidence is also especially needed in policy formulation and in assessing progress and the attitudes of citizens and politicians towards conflict.
In the implementation of the Peace Security and Stability (PSS) program, interactions with the peace structures both at the national and local level are inevitable. It is thus imperative to interrogate the role and effectiveness of the peace structures in advancing peaceful co-existence in the country. In addition, the implementation of conflict early warning and early response will be assessed. In 2001, the Government of Kenya established the National Steering Committee (NSC) on Peacebuilding and Conflict Management which was mandated to formulate a national policy on conflict management, and to coordinate various peacebuilding initiatives including the local peace committees.
The National Policy on Peacebuilding and Conflict Management, which was adopted by the National Assembly in 2013 as Sessional Paper No 5 of 2014, proposes an infrastructure for peace in Kenya that requires key stakeholders and peace actors within the country to adopt a collaborative problem-solving approach to conflict through consultation and dialogue. This infrastructure is instrumental to the sustainability of peace in Kenya, which has suffered a violent past in electoral processes and continues to experience recurrent conflicts that are diverse in nature. The Peacebuilding and Conflict Management Policy encourages Kenya to look internally and find homegrown solutions through dialogue and multi-stakeholder consultations. The proposed infrastructure of peace takes into account the context within which it will operate and proposes institutional mechanisms appropriate to the Kenyan context. Components of the peace structure are a National Peace Council, National and County Peace Secretariats, National and County Peace Fora, Local Peace Committees and Mediation Support Units. These components are interdependent and complementary in design and will be comprised of experienced individuals with the capacities to prevent, mitigate and transform conflicts.
The Peacebuilding and Conflict Management Policy also seeks to support the establishment and operationalization of a robust national conflict early warning and early response (NCEWERS) infrastructure and capability. The NCEWERS seeks to forecast the outbreak of armed conflict, or at minimum, to detect the early escalation of violence, with the objective of preventing the outbreak or further escalation of violence in order to save lives. It is important to note that in addition to coordinating the national and cross-border peace-building and conflict management initiatives, the National Steering Committee on Peacebuilding and Conflict Management (NSC) also serves as Kenya’s Conflict Early Warning and Response Unit (CEWERU) for implementation of the Conflict Early Warning and Response Mechanism (CEWARN) established under the protocol establishing the CEWARN that was acceded to by the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) Member States (Kenya, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia, Uganda, Sudan and South Sudan). Further, the NSC is the National Conflict Early Warning Centre (NCEWC) for implementation of the East African Community (EAC) Conflict Prevention Management and Resolution (CPMR) Mechanism. In Kenya, the early warning systems have been blamed for failing to give the necessary warning of the impending occurrence of conflict or violence; further, their response capacity has also failed to meet the needs/expectations of the stakeholders. The question thus in the minds of practitioners is how effective is the NCEWERS and how does it triangulate early warning data and response capacities with other regional mechanisms such as CEWARN early and EAC?
The Task and Desired Outcomes
It is against the above background that Act! is seeking the services of a suitably qualified and experienced consultant(s) to undertake a study on the status and effectiveness of the national peace architecture in the country in the context of devolution.
Objectives of the Study
The main objective of the study is to investigate the status and effectiveness of the national peace architecture in the country in the context of devolution.
Specific Objectives of the Study:

To find out the current status of the national peace architecture, including national conflict early warning and early response, in Kenya.
To establish to what extend has the National Peace Policy been implemented in the country, especially in the context of devolution (why some counties have domesticated it whereas others have not).
To investigate the challenges, mitigation measures and lessons learned in the implementation of the national peace architecture, including its structures in the devolved units.
To establish, if any, any other viable national and or local level peace building infrastructure in the context of devolution and emergence of conflicts such as radicalization, violent extremism and extractives.
To generate practical policy and programming strategies and recommendations for making the national peace architecture, or any other alternatives, vibrant and effective.
To generate policy proposals for the operationalization of the National Policy on Peacebuilding and Conflict Management that can be presented to policy makers for adoption.

Proposed Approach & Methodology
The consultant will undertake a study to investigate the mandate and effectiveness of the peace infrastructure in Kenya. Furthermore, the existence and the role played by the various peace building structures, early warning and response systems will be interrogated. The primary methodology will involve among others: desk reviews of available qualitative and quantitative data, including reports from the National Steering Committee on Peacebuilding (NSC), National Cohesion and Integration Commission (NCIC), police crime reports and other relevant reports. Other approaches may include, but not limited to, key informant interviews; observation, and focus group discussions
Whereas Act! expects the consultant (s) to suggest other methods and approaches, it has made suggestions on the proposed detailed approach as follows:

Desk review & analysis: Review of existing literature on the subject matter; including what has worked (successes), what has not worked (including challenges and lessons learned).
Field data collection: The consultant will collect primary data from sampled counties agreed between Act! and the consultant. This will be realized through mini-surveys, key informant interviews and focused group discussions (FGDs).
Data analysis: The collected data will be analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. The analyzed data will be presented in a manner that can easily be consumed by stakeholders, security agencies and the government.

Reporting Writing and Supervision
The consultant(s) will work closely with the Act’s Program Manager (PSS) and will be under the direct supervision of the Program Officer (PSS). There will be collaborative engagements with the Head of MERL and the Director of Programs.
Deliverable
The key deliverables for the consultant (s) will be assessed against the provisions of this TORs. In synopsis, the following are the key deliverables and expected outputs:

Inception Report – detailing the consultant’s approach, methodology complete with data collection tools, sampling techniques, a work plan for undertaking the assignment and draft outline of the report. This is due within 5 working days of signing the contract.
Draft Assessment Report: This report, of no more than 40 pages (excluding annexes such as interview questions, sampling technique), will have detailed information analyzing whether the national peace architecture (peace structures and early warning and response system) are achieving the desired results. The report will be reviewed by Act! staff and the comments shared with the consultant.
Final Assessment Report: A final designed ready to print report of not more than 30 pages (excluding annexes as indicated above) incorporating comments from the Act! reviewers will be submitted to Act!.
A Policy Paper (approximately 4 pages) on the Status of the National Peace Architecture and Early Warning System in Kenya (to be shared with relevant policymakers, security agencies and the development community).

Duration of the Assignment
This task will be carried out over a period of 45 consultancy days.