UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI

KISUMU CAMPUS

FACULTY OF BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCE

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT

PhD-RESEARCH METHODS IN PROJECT PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT

LDP 802: Advanced Research Methods in Project Planning and Management.

Theoretical Research paper on: Evaluability assessment process and its application to ethnic
profiling in the Kenya National Cohesion and Integration Policy

PETER ODERO-L83/59764/2022

SUBMITTED TO DR. ISAAC ABUYA

 ABSTRACT

Mismanagement of Kenya's racial and ethnic variety has fostered racial and ethnic distrust,
friction, and conflict. In order to foster harmonious living in the country and protect the interests
of the most vulnerable, the laws controlling ethnic profiling must be reexamined. This work aims
to investigate how the Evaluability Assessment approach, when applied to the KNCIP, might
foster greater racial and ethnic diversity by increasing participants' awareness of the program,
pride in their participation, effective management, and informed policy decisions. The research
aimed to better understand the role of evaluability evaluation in four key areas: (1) program
design and redesign; (2) data collecting and its utility; (3) policy development; and (4) program
performance with the aim of fostering social cohesion. Both empirical and theoretical data were
assessed using a desktop search and the Google scholar search engine, and then picked using a
purposive sample strategy. According to the study's key results, racial profiling severely damages
Kenya's social fabric and undermines the country's overall sense of unity. By balancing reporting
that alienates parts of society, elucidating misconceptions and misrepresentations, and
encouraging community participation (especially from minorities and marginalized individuals)
across socioeconomic and cultural divides, the EA process can help strengthen social cohesion
with the help of management, stakeholders, and the necessary resources. In order to evaluate the
KNCIP and develop interventions that further improve national harmony and social cohesion,
this study concludes that a thorough EA should be undertaken on it in accordance with
established standards. In order to improve the EA process and the outcomes of ethnic identity
initiatives, it was suggested that training and education be provided to key parties, that
beneficiaries be involved in the EA, that policies be formulated more effectively, and that more
empirical research be conducted.
Key Words: Evaluability Assessment, Evaluability Assessment process, Ethnic profiling, Social
cohesion, KNCIP, key stakeholders, ethnic diversities, Corrective interventions, policies and
improved program performance

EVALUABILITY ASSESSMENT PROCESS AND ITS APPLICATION TO ETHNIC

PROFILING IN THE KENYA NATIONAL COHESION AND INTEGRATION POLICY.

Introduction
Evaluability assessments have seen a rise in popularity ever since the beginning of the 21st
century. Because of this, there is a paucity of published material on the subject of how evaluators
and researchers can practically implement prescriptive articulations of evaluability. As a result,
there is a lack of knowledge regarding how to improve the quality of future evaluations and
diminished program effectiveness. A literature analysis on Evaluability assessment techniques
and their application to ethnic profiling in the Kenya National Cohesion and Integration Policy is
the goal of this article. Evaluability assessment, or EA for short, is a methodical strategy for the
design of evaluation initiatives, as stated in the definition provided by Leviton et al., 2010. It
requires the development and evaluation of a logic model or theory of change, structured
engagement with stakeholders to clarify intervention goals and how they are expected to be
achieved, and the provision of advice on whether an evaluation can be carried out at a reasonable
cost or whether additional development work on the intervention should be completed first. To
put it another way A is a quick study that determines whether or not a program will be beneficial
and if it is possible to implement it.

According to Davies (2013), a well-articulated scholar on evaluability, an EA is established by

programme managers to assist them in bringing early modifications and corrective interventions
to execution as required. EA provides value by narrowing the focus of interventions that are put
forward as candidates for evaluation and establishing the likelihood of measurable impact before
resources are committed to a full-scale evaluation. In other words, EA helps to determine
whether or not an intervention is likely to have an impact. It has the potential to prevent
commitments to assess programs in which further development is necessary or in which there is
little realistic expectation of benefit, so making the evaluations that are carried out more helpful.
In addition to this, it provides a foundation for productive engagement with the many
stakeholders, regardless of whether or not a comprehensive evaluation is carried out. By ensuring
that policy-makers and practitioners are involved from the very beginning in the process of
generating and evaluating assessment options, this should support the translation of research
findings into practice.

In the framework of this study, the application of evaluability assessment into the Kenya national
cohesion and integration policy (KNCIP) is the focus of attention. The goal of this improvement
is to enhance ethnic profiling in Kenya. First, the Keynesian National Cooperative Improvement
Program (KNCIP), as it is defined in this research paper, is both a process and an outcome of
instilling and enabling all people to have a sense as well as a feeling that they are members of the
same community engaged in a common business, facing shared difficulties and opportunities.
This paper focuses on the first part of that definition. The Kenya National Cohesion and
Integration Policy prioritizes ethnic profiling interventions in order to foster national unity. This
can be improved through evaluability assessments, which basically point to promoting better
policy choices and increased accountability in programs. The overarching goal of the policy is to
foster national cohesion and integration in Kenya. Ethnic profiling is also a subject of focus,
which, according to (Keskinen, et al, 2018), refers to suspecting that someone has committed a
crime based on the person's race, ethnicity, or religion, rather than on any evidence. This is also a
topic of discussion. Ethnic profiling is also a subject of focus. This is most clearly seen in the
manner in which individuals are treated, which is frequently less favorably than the manner in
which others who are in a similar situation are treated, which in turn leads to a deterioration in
relations between various groups in society and a reduction in relations within the community.

Evaluability assessment of the KNCIP, it is believed, will increase ethnic diversity through a
number of proposed corrective interventions with the appropriate stakeholders including project
managers and influencers as supported up by Wholey (1979), a (EA) seeks to acquire
information from crucial documents and feedback from stakeholders concerning the content and
objectives of the program in order to improve program performance. In this paper, an
evaluability assessment of KNCIP on matters of ethnic profiling is proposed. This assessment
would follow EA procedures and should be applied as early as possible during the design stage
of an intervention. This would allow for the identification of the questions to be answered, the
evaluation criteria to be used, the data to be collected, and the analysis to be undertaken in order
to improve monitoring of the quality assurance systems. This is done in order to support policy
influencers in the establishment of policies that aim to reduce ethnic profiling and increase
community cohesiveness. Evaluability assessment is only appropriate if the management is
prepared to invest in evaluation, and if they are able to define project performance in terms of
realistic, quantifiable goals, or if they have determined on intended applications of specific
evaluation information.

Purpose of the research paper

 The main purpose of the research paper is to examine the evaluability assessment process and its
application to reducing ethnic profiling in the Kenya National Cohesion and Integration Policy

Objectives of the study

This study was guided by four objectives:

I. To review theoretical and empirical literature on evaluability assessment in improving

program performance aimed at reducing ethnic profiling in the Kenya National Cohesion
and Integration Policy
II. To review theoretical and empirical literature on how evaluability assessment can lead to
better policy choices on ethnic profiling in the Kenya National Cohesion and Integration
Policy
III. To review theoretical and empirical literature on evaluability assessment in clarifying
program designs on ethnic profiling in the Kenya National Cohesion and Integration Policy
IV. To review theoretical and empirical literature on relevance of data collection and usefulness
on ethnic profiling in the Kenya National Cohesion and Integration Policy

Methodology

The research methodology employed, consisted of review of related theoretical and empirical
literature, a desk top search and a Google scholar search engine.

On the review of related theoretical and empirical literature, the research identified evaluability
assessment process based on multiple scholar’s perceptions, opinions, attitudes, standpoints, and
beliefs about an existing situation. Literature was also reviewed on ethnic profiling as a priority
area in the Kenya National Cohesion and Integration policy.

A desktop search was also conducted as recommended by Jacsó, P. (2005), on evaluability

assessment process and selected variables on the KNCIP.

Further related search was also conducted using Google scholar search engine by incorporating
terms such as “Evaluability”, “Kenya National Cohesion and Integration policy”, “evaluability
assessment process”, “transparency", "importance of evaluability” “ethnic profiling”. From this
search, a number of results based on related articles were captured

Selection of the most suitable literature was conducted after the searches, through purposive
sampling, as recommended by Etikan, et al (2016) for the research study.
Literature Review

Literature on Evaluability Assessment

According to Wholey (1994), the primary goal of evaluability assessment is to monitor the
quality assurance systems that are being established in an organization by the program staff and
partners in the short, medium, and long terms, using the program documentation as a reference.
This goal is highlighted as the most important aspect of evaluability assessment.

A successful Evaluability Assessment can lead to outcomes that are more appropriate and
practical, as well as an implementation of the program that is typically more solid. According to
Smith (1989) and Wholey (1979), additional benefits to EA that are worth noting for those who
are interested in adopting the process and method include the following, and they are as follows:
(a) the ability to distinguish between program failure and evaluation failure; (b) accurate
estimation of long term outcomes; (c) increased investment in the program by stakeholders; (d)
improved program performance; (e) improved program development and evaluation skills of
staff; and (f) increased visibility. Studies on EA are provided below, each of which demonstrates
how the process and EA systems that have been put into place have the capacity to measure and
verify results, thereby contributing to an improvement in the performance of the programs.

Lam, S., and Skinner, K. (2021), did a study on The Use of Evaluability Assessments in
Improving Future Evaluations. The primary objective of the study was to determine how
evaluability assessments might be utilized to improve the practicality of future evaluations. In
order to identify the characteristics, problems, and prospects of evaluability evaluations based on
a scoping examination of case studies, a sample of 59 respondents was purposefully selected to
participate in the survey. The findings revealed that evaluability assessments are now being
utilized for program development and evaluation planning. This can only take place if the
appropriate stakeholders are brought on board, and if organizations are willing to participate in
evaluation. In addition, the EA process is not without its share of obstacles, the most notable of
which being the politics of evaluability, the ambiguity that exists between evaluability and
evaluation, and the inadequate considerations given to gender equity and human rights.
According to the findings of the study, in order to maintain relevance and evaluability,
techniques need to develop in a way that is consistent with the rapidly changing environment.
Following the evaluation, the recommendations included embedding evaluability assessment
practice into the life cycle of the program; involving stakeholders; clarifying what evaluability
assessments entail; examining program understandings, plausibility, and practicality; and
addressing cross-cutting themes.

Zint et al., 2011 carried out an evaluation to see whether or not the "More Kids in the Woods"
program of the United States Forest Service could be evaluated.

The primary objective of the process of evaluability evaluation was to examine an internal grant
initiative that consisted of 26 funded submissions in order to determine the practicability of the
program. An evaluator and a team of seven stakeholders were responsible for carrying out the
environmental assessment for the purposes of consultation. These stakeholders included forest
management and staff members who understand the objective of environmental impacts to
youths through the creation of logic models in order to clarify the program design and its goals.
A study was carried out, and the findings of the environmental assessment showed a better
knowledge of the reasons why more underprivileged youngsters require outdoor experiences in
the woods and the potential benefits that come along with it. In addition, the findings referred to
the kinds of evaluations that will be valuable and add to the little literature on environmental
grant programs. Furthermore, the findings pointed to the evaluation interests, practices, and
perceived competencies of environmental educators. The EA made it easier to involve a greater
number of children in projects of a similar nature and made certain that the project goal was
achieved on schedule.

Boodhoo and Louw (2020) did yet another empirical study on the investigation of programme
evaluability in a variety of diverse practice scenarios. The primary objective of the research was
to investigate, both inductively and through comparative analysis, how evaluators working in
diverse contexts (i.e. high-income or middle-income nations, with or without developed
evaluation cultures) operationalize program evaluability. The Q-sort method was utilized in order
to geographically distribute the expert sample and systematically uncover evaluability
perspectives that are both unique to individual evaluator cohorts and common to a variety of
evaluator groups. The Q factor analysis was used to examine the responses from 229 respondents
located in a variety of different nations, including the United States of America, the United
Kingdom, Brazil, and South Africa. The evaluators discussed the most important aspects of the
findings in each of the cases, taking into account the various settings. According to the findings,
the evaluability of a program was very important in all of the different contexts for cross-border
cooperation, in addition to the formation of viable solutions to reconcile diverse points of view.
One of the suggestions that was made was to carry out the environmental assessment (EA) with
the participation of all the important stakeholders who are knowledgeable about both the EA and
the setting of the study.

Ethnic profiling

Politicians and other leaders in our country engage in ethnic profiling with the intention of
tearing the social fabric of the country apart. However, as of late, plans are in the works, and
some of them have already been put into action, to ensure interventions that promote peaceful
coexistence. These plans come from both state and non-state actors. In addition, precautions have
been taken to eliminate the possibility of discriminatory racial or ethnic profiling actually taking
place or being misunderstood as having taken place. Such actions can be done at both the
management and the operational levels, and they include the following: giving clear guidelines to
officers; training that allows officers to create good relations with communities; recording the
use of stop and search powers supported by proper internal oversight and complaints processes to
detect and remedy discriminatory policing practices; the use of good intelligence and, in
particular, excellent suspect descriptions; and the use of good intelligence and, in particular,
good suspect descriptions. At a more basic level, developing excellent relations through
community policing can help to enhance trust and cooperation. This is particularly important
when working with underrepresented minorities who may already feel under suspicion. This is
also crucial in the long term as a means of eradicating preconceptions and erroneous stereotypes
that individual cops may hold. The following is a review of the empirical and theoretical
literature pertaining to ethnic profiling. They bring to light the various aspects, as well as the
benefits and drawbacks, of the ethnic diversity that exists within our social structures, which
contributes to a decline in social cohesion.

Klaus (2020) conducted a survey to investigate the political effects of ethnic grievance appeals.
The results show that citizens receiving land titles are more fearful of the electoral process,
despite the fact that their trust in the state has increased as a result of the appeals process. This
survey was based on an original survey that was carried out in Kenya. As a consequence of this,
the experience of electoral violence will, in the vast majority of circumstances, be highly diverse,
with some individuals having very little cause for fear of it and others seeing elections to be
extraordinarily dangerous events. In addition, Wahman and Goldring (2020) demonstrate that the
fact that competitive elections are more violent overall does not necessarily mean that
perpetrators target voters in the areas that are considered to be the most competitive.

Gutie'rrez- LeBas (2020) uses a vignette experiment to show that voters are less likely to vote for
candidates alleged to have committed violence. However, this sanctioning impact is smaller for
the poor and those who have been exposed to violence in the past. The experiment focuses on
Kenya. Young (2020) investigates the effects of violence on the tendency to protest and on
negative emotional responses in settings that are oppressive.

In addition, Von and Kuhn (2020) carried out a theoretical literature analysis in which they
investigated the impact that voter information has on candidate tactics and the interactions
between voters and politicians in developing countries. According to the findings, major factors
that influence targeting include socioeconomic position (urban vs. rural), level of political
knowledge, and level of education. Some of the studies presented in this special issue also
highlighted potentially problematic implications for voter education efforts. These findings
demonstrated that violence is likely to be targeted at groups that then anticipate threats and
modify their behavior in accordance with the new circumstances. According to Von and Kuhn's
research (2020), among African residents, informed voters are more frequently targeted with
violence than uninformed voters since they are more difficult to convince using alternative
methods.
In the context of Guatemala, González-Ocantos et al. (2020) use list experiments to expose the
different strategic motivations that are at the root of voter intimidation and vote-buying. They
establish intimidation as a method that is largely employed to demobilize voters who are not
sensitive to vote-buying and in situations where there is a low danger of the intimidation being
reported. Because of these factors, rural and low-income voters are at a greater disadvantage.

In a study that was carried out by Ferree, et al. in 2014 and titled "Why and how did fraud occur
in Kenya's 2007 elections?" the researchers investigated the reasons behind electoral fraud as
well as its political repercussions. The study focuses on the repercussions of electoral flaws such
as protest and violence, as well as ways in which these issues might be remedied through the
promotion of inclusion, participation, and ethnic diversity. Results have indicated that when
elections are held in Kenya, power dynamics and systems that favor certain groups over others
are regularly observed. This is something that occurs as a direct result of the lack of free and fair
elections that are held in Kenya. It is commonly held that the results of elections contain some
sort of error, and this perception is largely brought about by political leaders who separate
residents on the basis of their tribes, so undermining efforts to foster ethnic variety. Since that
time, significant changes have been made in the country, and now the people of Kenya have a
new constitution. This new constitution limits the powers of the executive branch of government
and establishes independent institutions that are not subject to manipulation by the executive
branch of government. The most important of these include a revamped judicial system and an
Independent Election and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) that is strongly associated with the
values of respect, reciprocity, cultural sensitivity, and responsiveness that govern human
interactions to ensure cohesion and peaceful co-existence. These are the most important of these
reforms.

The Management of Religious Conflicts in Kenya: Challenges and Opportunities was the topic
of an essay that was published in the journal Moywaywa in 2018. The purpose of the study was
to discover answers to questions on the necessity for religious communities in Kenya to
collaborate in order to foster harmonious coexistence both within themselves and throughout the
country. In this study, we adopted Kung's hypothesis, which states that the effective management
of inter-religious conflicts could provide a necessary ground upon which to find the effective
management of inter-ethnic conflicts without discrimination. This hypothesis was supported by
the findings of the study. In order to collect data for this paper, a survey of the relevant literature
was carried out, and selected interviews were also carried out with a few members of the
Christian, Muslim, and Seikh communities. The most important things that came out of this
research were that religious disputes are largely caused by religious profiling, which can be
broken down into categories like historical, social, economic, cultural, environmental, and
religious trends. This, in turn, has a disastrous effect on the socio-economic and religious growth
in the country, which does not promote peaceful coexistence and does not help the country move
forward. Opportunities such as peaceful coexistence, social cohesiveness, social fairness, and
social inclusion, amongst others, are some of the benefits that result from the absence of ethnic
conflicts. Other advantages include the fact that all religious groups embrace the virtues of peace,
love, and unity. As a result, the paper suggested the establishment of measures to ensure the
cultivation of a sense of cooperation within and between the various religious groups.
Additionally, the paper stressed the need for increased member participation in inter-religious
dialogue and initiatives to promote peace.

Kamalu, N. C. carried out research on the topic of African Americans and racial profiling by law
enforcement in the United States (2016).

The purpose of the study was to investigate the background of racial profiling; assess the views
taken by the courts about the issue; review relevant literature and conduct an analysis on the
subject; and examine the data collected by Nebraska's law enforcement between the years 2002
and 2007.

The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that race is a predictor or determining factor
of who (which motorist) and passengers in Nebraska will be stopped, searched, arrested,
detained, or prosecuted by the police. Both secondary and primary sources of information were
gathered. The available empirical data demonstrated that there was considerable evidence of
racial profiling in the actions and choices of the police, including stops, searches, arrests, and
detentions, as well as decisions made by prosecutors. The research came to the conclusion that
deliberate racial profiling in Nebraska was to blame for the disproportionately high number of
arrests of racial minorities (black/African American, Hispanic, and Native American) compared
to their white counterparts in the state. The report proposed serious reform of the law
enforcement establishment to include public education, public involvement, community policing,
sensitivity training, race-based diversity recruitment, and information gathering. These changes
are intended to strengthen law enforcement as well as eliminate racial profiling in the state of
Nebraska and beyond.

Application of the Evaluability Assessment in Ethnic Profiling.

Conducting evaluations and assessments of programs is, thus, the hallmark of effective project
performances through better policy formulations and redesigning of programs. Evaluation has
taken center stage in today's discourse, legislation, funding, and management of practically all
programs. EA is carried out by impartial evaluators who work in isolation but take inspiration
from decision-makers, managers, and project personnel. This not only makes sure that the
assessors live up to the standards set by the major stakeholders, but it also helps them investigate
the repercussions of any potential alterations to the activities or objectives of the project.

According to Wholey (1994), the primary goal of evaluability assessment is to provide quality
assurance mechanisms that are being built in an organization by the program personnel and
partners. This means that an evaluability evaluation is required at the beginning of any program
that aspires to provide clients with satisfactory service. This is done in order to give a monitoring
and research function that can improve the performance of the program. In the case of racial or
ethnic profiling, the Ministry of the Interior and Coordination offers advice on how to better
formulate policies regarding racial or ethnic profiling. As a result, they take the lead role in
identifying relevant members who evaluate documents on topics including legislations, grant
applications, evaluations, audits, and internal memoranda. The documents have the potential to
provide information regarding the intention of the program and whether or not it actually aims to
reduce racial or ethnic profiling. This will allow the program to be put into action with well-
defined goals, performance indicators, and potential avenues for program improvement.

To address ethnic profiling as a priority area in the KNCIP, through participation, a framework is
used after evaluation, and it is supposed to align to the community's beliefs, perceptions, and
opinion that interventions aimed at better policy choices include the following: I the
establishment of exchange programs across diverse groups, such as the promotion of inter-
diversity study tours; and (ii) the alignment of the framework to the community's beliefs,
perceptions, and opinion that interventions aimed at better policy choices include
(ii) Strengthening the institutions that promote and enforce zero tolerance with regard to
politicians and other members of society that propagate negative ethnicity; (iii) Include content
on positive ethnicity in school curricula (iv) Establish and implement an annual calendar of
cultural events across the country (v) Promote inter-ethnic and inter-community sports activities
such as athletics and football (vi) Promote entrepreneurial and business ventures across diverse
groups; (vii) Educate the public on the importance of racial and ethnic diversity (vii) Educate the
public on the importance of racial and ethnic diversity (vii) Educate the (vii) Encourage
charitable initiatives and volunteer activities that involve more than one community or ethnic
group. (viii) Give financial support from the government to groups that work to strengthen ties
between people of different cultures and ethnicities; (ix) Encouragement of issue-based reporting
by the media, as well as effective monitoring of all media outlets, with the goal of discouraging
the employment of any form of incitement; (x) Enhance data collection and management in order
to fill in the data gaps that now exist. In this regard, there is a demand across all of these
industries for secondary data that is disaggregated by other types of diversity, such as ethnicity.
(xi) Promote and encourage public and private sector capacity development programs in
managing diversity as a way of improving productivity and promoting cohesion in the country;
(xii) Design a communication strategy on cohesion and integration that fosters inter-ethnic and
inter-racial conversation. xi) Promote and encourage public and private sector capacity building
programs in managing diversity as a way of improving productivity and enhancing cohesion in
the country.

Evaluations of evaluability are estimated to take many days, weeks, or even months to complete,
depending on the amount of time that is available and the scope of the possible evaluation
activities. This particular process increases the possibility that evaluations will offer timely,
relevant, and responsive evaluation findings for decision makers and policy influencers. The
evaluability assessment adheres to a certain process that is defined below as advocated by
Wholey (1979). Even if each stage of the evaluability assessment is significant in its own right, it
is imperative that you do not become stuck on any one of them.

The following is an outline of the steps involved in doing EA:

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Evaluations based on a literature study and theoretical research have indicated that programs
perform more effectively when their designs are made clearer and better policy decisions are
made. This results in less racial profiling, increased accountability, and increased openness. The
EA works to ensure that programs to reduce racial and ethnic profiling have a reasonable amount
of consensus regarding their goals and the requirements they must meet to be successful. When
conducting an Evaluability Assessment, which takes place in a procedural manner for the most
part, the primary areas of concern that need to be addressed are key stakeholders, the plausibility
of the Project goals (the probability that the goals will be accomplished), and the collection of
relevant data at a cost that is reasonable.
The Evaluability Assessment of the KNCIP was required because it is a leading assumption in
recently reviewed studies that recent social, political, and legal events have increased the risk of
ethnic profiling, particularly for the marginalized groups in the country. This led to the
requirement that the assessment be conducted. When this is done at the planning phase of the
project, it guarantees that all measures of difference, including sex, gender, age, nationality, race,
and religion, are taken into account. This results in higher performance from the project overall.
In addition to this, it ought to take into account the proposed interventions for improved policies
that foster peaceful coexistence and acknowledge the value of ethnic variety. In order to achieve
this national cohesiveness, participation from a wide variety of official and non-state actors, such
as the ministry of the interior and coordination, community representatives from the community's
marginalized portion, religious leaders, politicians, and peace mediators, is required. who would
be responsible for reviewing the documentation of the project in the future, including the laws
that protect human rights and forbid bias in social structures?
Also results of the study indicated that Evaluation of assessments have benefits that outweigh
their disadvantages. The advantages aim at clarifying project goals, redesigning of the projects ,
balancing reporting that do not antagonize components of society, clarifying misconceptions and
misrepresentations, community participation irrespective of socio-economic and cultural
differences, Campaigning for the positive implementation of devolution as a means to cohesion
and integration and rooting for minorities and marginalized individuals through provision of
interventions that is utilized by policy influencers. EA disadvantages that can be problematic
during evaluability assessments if not addressed they are, misrepresentation of a team, and
time-consuming nature of the procedure.
Conclusion of the research paper states that, a comprehensive EA promotes real knowledge of
the program, ownership, management for success, and pathways to better policy choices and
should therefore be conducted on the KNCIP on the priority area of ethnic profiling for improved
relations and cohesion purposes.

RECCOMMENDATIONS.

Ethnic profiling is not a new concept and has a close association with transformative paradigm
that believes in values of respects, reciprocity, cultural sensitivity and responsiveness that govern
human interactions as discussed above. The outlined recommendations have been made by the
study to further improve on the KNCI policy that aims at reducing ethnic profiling;

i. An empirical study should be further conducted on application of evaluability

assessments in ethnic profiling programs in order to further clarify project policy,
formulate better projects and improve program performance.
 ii. The government should engage the beneficiaries and policy influencers in participation

processes through the Ministry of Interior and Coordination of National Government to

have better policy choices that promote ethnic diversity.

iii. Capacity building and training should be offered to relevant stakeholders (police, courts,
teachers, community members) to enhance their skills in ending ethnic profiling.

REFERENCES

Boodhoo, A., & Louw-Potgieter, J. (2020). Evaluability perspectives: An empirical investigation

of programme evaluability in different practice contexts. African Evaluation Journal, 8(1), 1-12

Davies, R. (2013). Planning evaluability assessments: A synthesis of the literature with

recommendations. Report of a study commissioned by the Department for International
Development.

D’Ostie-Racine, L., Dagenais, C., & Ridde, V. (2013). An evaluability assessment of a West
Africa based non-governmental organizations (NGO) progressive evaluation strategy. Evaluation
and Program Planning, 36(1), 71-79.

Ferree, K. E., Gibson, C. C., & Long, J. D. (2014). Voting behavior and electoral irregularities in
Kenya's 2013 Election. Journal of Eastern African Studies, 8(1), 153-172.
Gutiérrez-Romero, R., & LeBas, A. (2020). Does electoral violence affect vote choice and
willingness to vote? Conjoint analysis of a vignette experiment. Journal of Peace Research,
57(1), 77–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343319892677

Kamalu, N. C. (2016). African Americans and racial profiling by USA law enforcement: an
analysis of police traffic stops and searches of motorists in Nebraska, 2002-2007. African
Journal of Criminology & Justice Studies, 9(1).

Lam, S., & Skinner, K. (2021). The Use of Evaluability Assessments in Improving Future
Evaluations: A Scoping Review of 10 Years of Literature (2008–2018). American Journal of
Evaluation, 42(4), 523-540.

Leviton LC, Khan LK, Rog D, Dawkins N, Cotton D. Evaluability assessment to improve public
health policies, programs, and practices. Annu Rev Public Health. 2010;31:213-33. doi:
10.1146/annurev.publhealth.012809.103625. PMID: 20235852

Moywaywa, C. K. (2018). Management of Religious Conflicts in Kenya: Challenges and

opportunities. International Journal of Education and Research, 6(1), 129-142.

Trevisan, Michael S. and Huang, Yi Min (2002) "Evaluability assessment: A primer," Practical
Assessment, Research, and Evaluation: Vol. 8, Article 20.

Thurston, W. E., & Ramaliu, A. (2005). Evaluability assessment of survivors of torture program:
lessons learned. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 20(2), 1.

Van der Leun, J. P., & Van der Woude, M. A. (2011). Ethnic profiling in the Netherlands? A
reflection on expanding preventive powers, ethnic profiling and a changing social and political
context. Policing and society, 21(4), 444-455.

Wholey, J. S. (1996). Formative and summative evaluation: Related issues in performance

measurement. Evaluation practice, 17(2), 145-149.

Wholey, J. S. (1979). Evaluation--Promise and performance. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

Zint, M. T., Covitt, B. A., & Dowd, P. F. (2011). Insights from an evaluability assessment of the
US Forest Service More Kids in the woods initiative. The Journal of Environmental
Education, 42(4), 255-271.