Sie sind auf Seite 1von 34

CHALLENGES FACING SUSTAINABILITY OF COMMUNITY BASED POLICING IN KENYA (A case of Nairobi Eastland)

By

MWAS KIM/DPM/00000

A research proposal submitted in partial fulfillment for the requirement of Diploma in Project Management of Kenya Institute of Management.

July, 2008

DECLARATION:
I ---------------------------------the undersigned declare that this proposal is my original work and it has never been submitted to any other college or institution of higher learning for award of any academic grade. Name: Sign: ---------------------Date: ---------------------DECLARATION BY SUPERVISOR: This proposal has been submitted for examination with my approval as the supervisor. Name: -------------------------Sign: --------------------Date: ------------------For and on behalf of Kenya Institute of Management Nairobi Branch Name: -------------------------Sign: --------------------Date: -------------------

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

iii

DEDICATION

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION:..........................................................................................................ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT............................................................................................iii DEDICATION..............................................................................................................iv TABLE OF CONTENTS...............................................................................................v DEFINITION OF TERMS ..........................................................................................vii CHAPTER ONE.............................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................1 1.1 OVERVIEW.............................................................................................................1 1.2 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY.........................................................................1 1.2.1 Profile..................................................................................................................4 1.3 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM.........................................................................5 1.4 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY .............................................................................6 1.4.1 The General Objectives.......................................................................................6 1.4.2 The Specific objectives.......................................................................................6 1.5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS.......................................................................................6 1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESEARCH...................................................................7 1.7 SCOPE OF THE STUDY.........................................................................................7 1.8 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY............................................................................8 1.9 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK..............................................................................8 CHAPTER TWO..........................................................................................................12 LITERATURE REVIEW.............................................................................................12 2.1 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................12 2.2 REVIEW OF PAST STUDIES...............................................................................12 2.2 CRITICAL REVIEW..............................................................................................15 2.3 SUMMARY.............................................................................................................15 CHAPTER THREE......................................................................................................17 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY........................................................17 3.1 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................17 3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN.............................................................................................17 3.3 TARGET POPULATION.......................................................................................17 3.4 SAMPLE DESIGN AND PROCEDURE...............................................................18 v

3.5 DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS AND PROCEDURES..........................18 3.6 DATA ANALYSIS.................................................................................................19 REFERENCES:............................................................................................................20 APPENDICES:.............................................................................................................22 APPENDIX: A.............................................................................................................22 TIME PLAN.................................................................................................................22 APPENDIX: B ............................................................................................................22 BUDGET PLAN...........................................................................................................22 APPENDIX: C..............................................................................................................23 RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS:...................................................................................23 INTERVIEW GUIDE:.................................................................................................23 APPENDIX: D.............................................................................................................24 QUESTIONAIRE.........................................................................................................24 Section I: General information.....................................................................................25 Section II: Observation/opinion/recommendation........................................................26

vi

DEFINITION OF TERMS
Community, a Community means individuals who share characteristics, regardless of their location or degree of interaction to do or perform common services. Community Policing is an approach to policing that recognizes the independence and shared responsibility of the Police and the Community in ensuring a safe and secure environment for all citizens. It aims at establishing an active and equal partnership between the Police and the public through which crime and community safety issues can jointly be discussed and solutions determined and implemented. Crime is the breach of a rule or law for which a punishment may ultimately be prescribed by some governing authority or force. Police are agents or agencies, usually of the executive, empowered to enforce the law and to affect public and social order through the legitimatized use of force. The term is most commonly associated with police departments of a state that are authorized to exercise the police power of that state within a defined legal or territorial area of responsibility.

vii

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION 1.1 OVERVIEW Community Policing focuses on crime and social disorder through the delivery of police services that includes aspects of traditional law enforcement, as well as prevention, problem-solving, Community engagement, and partnerships. The Community policing model balances reactive responses to calls for service with proactive problem-solving centered on the causes of crime and disorder. Community policing requires police and citizens to join together as partners in the course of both identifying and effectively addressing these issues. 1.2 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY Community policing is a crime prevention strategy that envisages the creation of a partnership between responsible members of the Community and the police in preventing crime. The significant decline in almost all categories of crime across the country is attributable as much to the vigilance of police officers as it is to the support and cooperation received from the public in line with the spirit of Community policing In Community Policing, citizens are viewed by the police as partners who share responsibility for identifying priorities, and developing and implementing responses. Accurate surveying of customer needs and priorities is required under Community policing to determine the problems that drive police services, and give the public ownership of the problem-solving process. The police are only one of the many local government agencies responsible for responding to Community problems. Under Community Policing, other government agencies are called upon and recognized for their abilities to respond to and address crime and social disorder issues. Community-based organizations are also brought into crime prevention and problem-solving partnerships with the police. The support and leadership

of elected officials, as well as the coordination of the police department at all levels, are vital to the success of these efforts. Community policing complements the use of proven and established enforcement strategies, becoming one of many tools available to officers that can be collectively employed to prevent and combat crime. As the philosophical foundation, emphasis is placed on the quality of individual and group efforts. In addition, police departments should be active partners in identifying laws that need to be amended or enacted, then working with lawmakers and organizing citizen support efforts to change them. Collectively, these activities allow police agencies to address underlying conditions that lead to crime while strongly enforcing breaches in the law. Departments became highly reactive under the traditional model of policing. Law enforcement responded to calls for service from citizens and focused primarily on arresting offenders after crimes had been committed. Under community policing, law enforcement focuses not only on enforcement, but also on crime prevention and proactively addressing the root causes of crime and disorder. The Community actively engages in collaborating on prevention and problem-solving activities with a goal of reducing victimization and fear of crime. Police, community members, and other public and private entities work together to address the underlying problems that contribute to crime and disorder by identifying and analyzing problems, developing suitable responses, and assessing the effectiveness of these responses. While enforcement is an integral part of policing, problem-solving relies less heavily on use of the traditional criminal justice system components and enforcement methods and more on preventing crime through deterring offenders, protecting likely victims, and making crime locations less conducive to problems. Department-wide adoption of Community policing is evidenced by the integration of the philosophy into mission statements, policies and procedures, performance evaluations and hiring and promotional practices, training programs and other systems and activities that define organizational culture and activities. Organizational systems support and

value a service orientation, and stress the importance of different units within the agency working cooperatively in support of Community policing. Implementation of the Community policing philosophy may occur incrementally and within specialized units at first, but a defined path leads towards full, department-wide implementation. In Community Policing, individual line officers are given the authority to solve problems and make operational decisions suitable to their roles, both individually and collectively. Leadership is required and rewarded at every level, with managers, supervisors, and officers held accountable for decisions and the effects of their efforts at solving problems and reducing crime and disorder with the Community. In Community policing, the majority of staffing, command, deployment, and tactical decision-making are geographically based. Appropriate personnel are assigned to fixed geographic areas for extended periods of time in order to foster communication and partnerships between individual officers and their community, and are accountable for reducing crime and disorder within their assigned area. The geographic boundaries are naturally determined based more on communities rather than statistical divisions. Community policing encourages the use of non-law enforcement resources within a law enforcement agency. Volunteerism involves active citizen participation with their law enforcement agency. The law enforcement organization educates the public about ways that they can partner with the organization and its members to further community policing, and provides an effective means for citizen input. Volunteer efforts can help to free up officer time, and allow sworn personnel to be more proactive and prevention oriented. Examples of such resources might include police reserves, volunteers, Explorer Scouts, service organizations, and citizen or youth police academies. There are a number of enhancers and facilitators that may assist departments in their transition to Community policing. For example, updated technology and information systems can facilitate Community Policing by providing officers access to crime and incident data which supports problem analysis or increases uncommitted officer time by reducing time spent on administrative duties. This results in enabling officers to spend

more time in the Community. In addition, enhanced technological and analytical capabilities allow the agency to gather timely information about crime problems, which supports better resource and personnel deployment while providing officers a better understanding of the problems within their beat. In addition, information must be made accessible not only to police officers, but also to the community. If officers are to be responsible for problems in their beat, and if the Community is to be an equal partner in combating crime and disorder, both must have access to timely and complete information. Finally, to effectively utilize the great potential of Community Policing, there is need to alter our attitudes against law enforcement, discard old stereotypes and instead forge cooperation. In this regard, the media can play an important role in shaping the attitudes and perception of the citizenly towards law and order. The centrality of security in our daily lives requires that our sense of civic responsibility shift from that of bystander to one of active involvement. 1.2.1 Profile Eastland have been the centre with the highest crime in Nairobi. The crime ranges from Carjacking, mugging, possession of illegal firearms, to house breaking among others. Many residents of Eastlands have been killed by armed gangsters in the past years. It is easy possible to investigate a capital crime in the area since there is a lot of secrecy around it. People don't want to report, write statements, or to be associated with murder cases hence making gathering evidence is painful and time consuming. Eastlands is also home to various sects and vicious gangs who terrorise the public. Most of estates in Eastlands poorly planned and densely populated mostly by low income earners and unemployed. Four constituencies make up Eastland: Kamukunji, Makadara, Embakasi and Mathare with Kasarani and Makadara on the outskirts. Parts of Makadara fall under South B, and

sections of Mathare extend to Kasarani. The centre of Eastlands is said to be Makadara, which is administratively run by a divisional officer. Eastlands estates include Buruburu, Kayole, Kasarani and Embakasi. Eastlands was a colonial reference to Jericho, Uhuru, Bahati, Maringo, Kaloleni and Kimathi estates. It was covered by Eastern Police Division (renamed Buruburu, after 1984). Other such divisions include: Northern (Kasarani and Muthaiga); Southern (Kilimani and Langata); and Western (Westlands and Parklands). In recent years some estates have developed from Embakasi estate which include; Umoja Komarock, Dadora Among others. 1.3 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM Throughout the 1990s, Nairobi had struggled with rising crime, earning a reputation for being a dangerous city and the nickname "Nairobbery". In 2001, the United Nations International Civil Service Commission rated Nairobi as among the most insecure cities in the world, classifying the city as "status C." The head of one development agency cited the "notoriously high levels of violent armed robberies, burglaries and carjacking. Crime had risen in Nairobi as a result of urbanization. As a security precaution, most large houses have a watch guard, burglar grills, and dogs to patrol their grounds during the night. Tourists are advised to conceal valuables at night. Ali (2008) reported that in 2004 the Kenya police launched a five years strategic plan that placed emphasis on crime prevention and robust enforcement action. Accordingly the Kenya police focus in 2007 placed emphasis on crime prevention through the collection of criminal intelligence targeting serious crimes that involve the use of fire arms such as car-jacking and robberies. To achieve this, prominence was given to rapid response by increasing mobile and foot patrols. Although the Kenya police is pleased by the growth of Community Policing, as crime preventing strategy that encourages the participation of the community, since its inception Community Policing have not opened all important avenues in forging formalized partnerships with the community against crime.

1.4 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1.4.1 The General Objectives


The purpose of the study is to establish the challenges facing sustainability of community based policing in Kenya. 1.4.2 The Specific objectives The specific objectives of the study will be: 1. To study how institutional change affects the sustainability of community based policing. 2. To find out how training and education affects the sustainability of community based policing. 3. To find out how organizational support and culture affects the sustainability of community based policing. 4. To study how Community Relations and Development affects the sustainability of community based policing. 1.5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS 1. How does institutional change affects the sustainability of community based policing? 2. How does organizational support and culture affects the sustainability of community based policing? 3. How does organizational support and culture affects the sustainability of community based policing? 4. How do Community Relations and Development affects the sustainability of community based policing?

1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESEARCH The move to a community policing model creates a number of advantages both for police and community. These include: More effective use of and increased resources increased access to information through community cooperation and vigilance Adjustment of service demands to the actual needs have given neighborhoods Proactive approaches to address social determinants of crime Identification and resolution of disputes before they escalate dismantling stereotypes by police of community members and vice-versa increased mutual understanding increased public approval decreased citizen complaints Community as a resource rather than an impediment to police Empowerment and power-sharing both within the police service and with the community increased police visibility and accessibility increased accountability to the local community for police actions A final clear advantage is that the move to community policing requires a new set of skills for police officers. This can lead to increased education standards, an increased level of professionalism, and a wider pool of candidates from which to draw. Many police services should recruit the best and brightest from our schools, and from nontraditional groups in the community. This allows police services to better reflect the community in which they serve and enhances their ability to form effective partnerships and open the lines of communications with groups that may have a tendency to mistrust members of law enforcement agencies. 1.7 SCOPE OF THE STUDY The researcher intends to carry out the research at Nairobi Eastland. The main focus will be Umoja estate. 7

1.8 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY There are limitations that the author is likely to face while carrying out the research. They include: Lack of cooperative and suspicion

Due to the nature of the problem, It will be difficult to obtain information as most of it will be considered sensitive considering the volatile environment caused by post election violence. This might arise when questionnaires will be presented for the members of the community to provide the required information. Most of them may be reluctant in giving appropriate answer to questions due to suspicion. Some respondents may flatly refuse to give information due to the fear of intimidation and victimization. This might lead to incomplete study of the problem as some vital information might not be retrieved from the appropriate sources. Inconveniences/ Time factor

Awaiting response or feedback from the respondents may be a time constraint the Researcher which may inconvenience him in writing the report. To overcome these constraints the researcher will ensure the respondent confidentiality to the information they give. The researcher will also avoid asking questions which might provoke the respondent. Enough time will also be given to the respondent to give their feedback. 1.9 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Community policing attempt to move away from an isolated and detached model where police rarely interact with the community except in response to a complaint, to one where the police are seen to be part of the community in which they serve. This breaking down of us vs. them mentality and a complaints-driven service can result in a new sense of partnership in keeping the community safe: a proactive service geared to prevention rather than just enforcement. Police response to crime is more reflective of and responsive to community needs through the community policing model.

Dependent variable

Dependent variable

Institutional change

Training and Education Civilian Governance and Policing

Organizational support and culture Community Relations and Development

Source, Elias (2008) Institutional change Community policing requires a complete shift in institutional policy, practices, and reward systems. If the community policing model is not reflected in the occupational subculture and conveyed through strong commitment from the top down, it is doomed to fail. It is not enough to have a code of values without enacting the policies, procedures and promotional decisions to match them. We need to start from scratch, beginning with the frame, the nuts and bolts, the right chassis and a high performance engine to move it along." Nor is community policing a one-way street. Community members have to take an active interest in working with their police services, be willing to dismantle misconceptions and prejudices to enter a new partnership, and hold the police accountable for fulfilling their end of this partnership. To achieve this, organizational change practices need to be followed. Some of these include:

Demonstrate strong leadership commitment to the principles and practices of community policing

Deploy adequate resources (time, people, money) to implement change strategies Evaluate and rewrite existing policy and practices Identify and address issues of power imbalance both within and outside of service Revamp reward systems to include community policing outcomes Develop relationships with community members on an ongoing basis Engage in inclusive recruitment, selection and hiring practices Develop and implement diversity training for all levels, civilian and sworn

The last two points cannot be emphasized enough. Numerous reports and citizens complaints over the years have focused on systemic discrimination in the justice system, including police services (Jedwab, 2001). High profile cases that allege racially motivated police brutality or racial profiling only increase the levels of distrust between the police and the communities in which they serve. Police and community training Community Policing training for all sworn and civilian personnel can serve as a facilitator to successful implementation of the philosophy. Training opportunities support Community Policing through alternative means of enforcing the law and impacting crime and disorder problems. Community policing training must be incorporated into all facets of training, and required for all department personnel and available to the Community, and expanded well beyond the definition and basic elements. Organizational Support and Culture Ensure support for community policing models and diversity organizational change from police leadership. Resistances to these efforts are often expressed passively, in the form of inaction. A programme or policy may be tolerated rather than given active support and this can happen at any level of an organization engaging in this process. Some examples include inadequately resourcing diversity initiatives, failing to address needed structural or policy changes, and finding no time to deal with issues of organizational change.

10

Active, visible and accountable support must be evident throughout senior staff levels. Positive change cannot occur without commitment and will on the part of senior staff, the rank and file, and their associations. Clear statements of executive endorsement followed by the appointment of senior management who are given sufficient resources and held accountable for structured implementation are necessary for success. Police command officers must ensure that their supportive attitudes to community policing and diversity organizational change are clearly understood within the lower ranks for which they are role models. Police leaders need to be trained in organizational change strategies and practices. In addition, Police Chiefs, municipal leaders and Police Commissions need to stop being defensive when charges against occur. Denial does not enhance community relationships nor promote examination of practices. Opportunities should be sought to work with the community to breakdown these perceptions if false, and to change organizational policies and practices if true. To establish transparency and create trust and accountability, police services need to render their commitment to community policing and practices publicly. Post their policies and commitments in public space, take the opportunity to speak to community groups, host public consultations, and identify positive media opportunities to highlight their efforts (Miner etal, 1994) Community Relations and Development We have seen that in an increasingly diverse society, there is a need to better reflect and represent all our communities including those that have been traditionally marginalized. Failure to do so can lead to accusations of racism, negative media attention, and poor relationships with communitys police services are mandated to serve and protect.

11

CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter will provide an overview of past studies on community based policing. The chapter will review what other researchers found out about the effectiveness of community policing in reducing crime rate. The different forms of challenges facing sustainability of community based policing will be discussed and how they play a major role in reduction of crime rate, boosting security, competence and improving the overall community policing performance. 2.2 REVIEW OF PAST STUDIES 2.1.1 General Views When police jurisdictions shifted to a community responsive service model some had been working in that model all along. The shift occurred in response to a number of issues including an emerging focus on race relations, allegations of police discrimination, and public disillusionment with what they saw as police services unresponsive to their concerns and with little accountability to the people (Wiltshire, date unknown). Community policing is an attempt to move away from an isolated and detached model where police rarely interact with the community except in response to a complaint, to one where the police are seen to be part of the community in which they serve. This breaking down of us vs. them mentality and a complaints-driven service can result in a new sense of partnership in keeping the community safe: a proactive service geared to prevention rather than just enforcement. Police response to crime is more reflective of and responsive to community needs through the community policing model. And while many police services continue to predicate rewards and promotions on enforcement outcomes, some are now including community service and cultural competence objectives in their performance appraisals.

12

In an enforcement model, the police are insulated from the community by procedures and organizational structure. In community policing models, police serve as one partner in the community working towards the same goals. However, a definition for community policing remains elusive, as each jurisdiction structures its service in different ways. Cryderman, O'Toole & Fleras (1992) point out that, in some cases, community policing is little more than rhetoric behind which business as usual continues. In other cases, commitment to community policing has resulted in a whole scale paradigm shift causing a reorganization of police values, commitments, priorities and objectives. As such, community policing occurs on a continuum from a few programs like neighborhood watch to a complete organizational change process. Cryderman, et al (1992) defines community policing as: A clearly articulated doctrine along with a corresponding set of principles, policies, and practices that link police and community members together in joint pursuit of local crime prevention. Another definition (Brown, 1989) refers to community policing as an interactive process between the police and community to mutually identify and resolve community problems. There are a number of barriers to instituting and sustaining community policing. Some of these come from within police organizations themselves, and some from external sources. One of the main barriers can be resistance and resentment from police officers who see it as an erosion of their powers and their ability to act with relative autonomy and anonymity. This may lead to open resistance and can be observed in comments such as "we are not social workers" or "this is not 'real' policing" (Cryderman, et al, 1992). Many police officers are vested in their roles as crime fighters, warriors against crime, and cherish an image of the tough law enforcer (Stansfield, 1996). Traditionally recruitment procedures and the organizational culture of police forces have reinforced this image. The community policing focus on service rather than enforcement makes many police personnel nervous and often those who work in more service-oriented divisions are seen

13

as "kiddie-cops" rather than "real cops". To those who wish to advance through the ranks, this disparagement of community service can create real limitations to their careers. Rewards are often assigned to enforcement rather than community or social outcomes. Another area of resistance may come from police associations, unions and municipal governments who may see the move to community policing as one that requires more resources, increasing the burden on already overworked and understaffed departments. While community policing may be seen as sound in theory, it is often seen as impractical in practice. Community policing may also be seen as an option or a luxury that is secondary to the achievement of central police objectives. Disconnect that occurs between community police or liaison officers and enforcement divisions can have disastrous consequences as, we will see later. Finally, there is little agreement on the definition of community, who represents a community, to which faction of the community the police service is responsible, and mechanisms for power sharing. All of these issues need to be clearly addressed to ensure the success of a community policing model. Because, despite these barriers, the advantages of a successful partnership between a police service dedicated to community policing and a community supportive of its police service are immeasurable. Civilian Governance and Policing The office of public complaints commissioner should be used to make police service successful effort at "civilianization' of police complaints procedures (Lewis, 1990). The goal is public accountability and fairness of treatment for the complainant and appropriate protection of the accused officer. While civilian review boards have their disadvantages, they can assist the police in "asserting worthwhile authority over officer conduct and reduce unnecessary and debilitating conflict with the community" (Lewis, 1990). 14

The public complaints procedure can lead to increased professionalism by the police in their relations with the community, and decreased the gravity of police misconduct allegations. It allows for useful recommendations for change in police policies and procedures that may help to avoid future complaints. It can also serve an education and mediation function for the police and the community. 2.2 CRITICAL REVIEW When community policing is done well, addressing crime is preventative and proactive. Police officers are positioned closer to information sources and receive early warnings of potential flare-ups in the community, thus responding to problems before they escalate into more serious incidents. They also establish relationships that create trust in the community, ensuring that community members are more likely to come forward when a crime has occurred. This is especially true in communities that have a long-standing fear and mistrust of the police and is probably the most powerful advantage of community policing. After all, we all have the same goal, to prevent crime rather than just to clean up its aftermath. 2.3 SUMMARY In an enforcement model, the police are insulated from the community by procedures and organizational structure. In community policing models, police serve as one partner in the community working towards the same goals. Commitment to community police requires a wholescale paradigm shift causing a reorganization of "police values, commitments, priorities [and] objectives". A number of internal and external barriers exist to developing community policing or police/community partnership models. But the numerous advantages warrant considering making this shift, including increasing trust in the community, better range and allocation of resources, developing proactive strategies to addressing crime, and identifying and resolving disputes before they escalate.

15

The proposal outlines several ways of community and police interactions. This ways outline how the researcher will study how police and communities can learn from both positive and negative interactions, and move ahead to forge a stronger relationship which can help to sustain community based policing.

16

CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 3.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter will deal with the methods and instruments which will be used in the study. It describes the steps, activities and instruments that the researcher will use to collect data. It also focuses on the research design, population and sampling techniques that will be used. 3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN The study will adopt a descriptive research design to establish the challenges facing sustainability of community based policing in Kenya. This method is preferred because it will allow for an in depth study of the subject. The method is used when collecting information related to habits or social issues. It focuses on respondent views; its an appropriate design because it will help the author identify the real challenges facing sustainability of community based policing. This will involve collection of appropriate data by use of oral interview, observations, literature search and questionnaires. 3.3 TARGET POPULATION The researcher targeted hundred members of the community who will be from different age groups and gender. The researcher hopes to come up with a sample of the population from which he will establish traits representing the whole population easily.

17

Table 3.1 Sample size GROUPS 18-24 years 25-31 years 32-38 years 39-45 years 46-51 years 51 years and above TOTAL Source: Elias, 2008 3.4 SAMPLE DESIGN AND PROCEDURE Stratified random sampling method will be used. Members of the community will be arranged into groups according to the characteristics that seem crucial to the study since each group is faced with different challenges. It will be necessary to pick from the strata developed and simple random sampling from each strata will be used. This will ensure that every member of the population had equal and independent chance of being selected into the sample. This will be done through the lottery system and finding a sample consisting of one hundred peoples. 3.5 DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS AND PROCEDURES Data will be collected using oral interview, observations, and literature search from books, publication, journals internet among others. He will also design questionnaires which will contain both open sand close ended questions when carrying out interview. This will be most appropriate since the respondent feeling, attitudes and opinions will be captured during data collection. TARGET 20 20 15 15 15 15 100 PERCENTAGE 20 20 15 15 15 15 100

18

3.6 DATA ANALYSIS The author will use various techniques to capture the data and analyze it. Both qualitative and quantitative techniques will be used. Descriptive statistics by use of tables, pie charts, percentages and graphs will be used researcher have a better view of respondents response in relation to what was expected of them.

19

REFERENCES:
Biles, J. & Ibrahim, H. (2002). After September 11th 2001: A tale of two Canada's. Presentation to 7th International Metropolis Conference, Oslo Norway. See www.international.metropolis.net. Canadian Centre for Race Relations (1993). A basis for national action: A selected bibliography of systemic discrimination in Canada. Ottawa. Canadian Heritage (2000). Call for action combating hate and bias activity: Recommendations from the June 2000 roundtable. Secretary of State (Multiculturalism, Status of Women). Cryderman, B., O'Toole, C.N. & Fleras, A. (1992). Police, Race and Ethnicity, 2nd. Ed. Toronto: Butterworths. Janhevich, D.E. (2002). Hate crime study: Summary results of consultations. Ottawa: Minister of Industry. ISMN 0-662-33026-9, Catalogue No. 85-557-XIE. See www.statcan.ca. Jedwab, J. (2001). A stock taking of recommendations in the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance in Canada (Draft) Vol 1. Canadian Heritage Multiculturalism. Major Gen. Mohamed H. Ali (2008). Kenya police crime report and data for 2007. Daily Nation Newspaper Wednesday March 5, 2008. Lewis, C. (1990). Police complaints in Metropolitan Toronto: Perspectives of the Public Complaints Commissioner. Toronto. Lewis, C. et al (1989). The report of the race relations policing task force. Toronto.

20

Miner, M., Turkewych, C., Davis, G., Lakhani, A. (1994). Police race relations guidelines: For management of institutional change. Police and Security Branch: Solicitor General Canada. Miner, M. (1993). Police race relations guidelines for management of institutional change (Draft 3). Police and Security Branch, Solicitor General Canada. Pruegger, V.J. (2002). Perceptions of racism and hate activity among youth in Calgary: The lived experience. City of Calgary. Pruegger, V.J. (1999). Guidelines for management of diversity organizational change in the Calgary Police Service. Calgary. Stansfield, R.T. (1996). Issues in policing: A Canadian perspective. Toronto: Thompson Educational. U.N. Starts Crime Study in Kenya's Capital Von Stein, J. (1996). Race relations training in the police curriculum in Canada: A content analysis. Canadian Centre for Police-Race Relations. Wiltshire, K. (unknown). Effective race relations through community policy: One police officer's perspective. Canadian Centre for Police-Race Relations. Wortley, S. (2001). What are the challenges and where should public policy be directed in order to produce safe, cohesive and healthy communities? Presentation to 5th National Metropolis Conference, Ottawa.

21

APPENDICES:
APPENDIX: A. TIME PLAN YEAR 2008 January-February March- June July- August September October ACTIVITY Title selection Writing of the research proposal Data collection & analysis Report writing Submission of the research project

APPENDIX: B BUDGET PLAN NO. ACTIVITY COST (KSH)

22

1 2 3 4 5 6

Stationery Binding Typing & printing Transport Literature search Miscellaneous Sub total

3,000.00 3,000.00 10,000.00 5,000.00 10,000.00 5,000.00 36,000.00

APPENDIX: C RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS: INTERVIEW GUIDE: Which part of Umoja do you reside? For how long have you stayed in Umoja? What do you know about community based policing projects in Kenya? 23

Is there community based policing in Umoja. If yes, what do you know about community based policing in Umoja? Do you know the role of both police and the public in community based policing? Do you think community based policing has any impact in reducing crime rate in the region? What are your views on the future of community based policing in Kenya? What do you think should be done to enhance sustainability of community based policing?

APPENDIX: D QUESTIONAIRE Respondent questionnaire on, the challenges facing community based policing in Kenya. Kindly go through the items given carefully and give your answer as indicated. Please tick appropriately ()

24

Section I: General information 1. Gender: Male ( ) Female ( ) 2. Age: 8yrs-24yrs, ( ) 25yrs-31yrs ( ), 32yrs-38yrs ( ), 39yrs-46yrs ( ) 51 yrs & above ( ) 3. Highest Education level: Primary ( ) Secondary ( ) College ( ) University ( ) 4. Employment details Employed ( ) Self employed ( ) Unemployed ( ) 5. Remuneration/ generated income per month Ksh 10,000 and Below Ksh 11,000- Ksh 30,000 ( )

25

Ksh31, 000- Ksh50, 000 ( ) Ksh 51,000- Ksh 70,000 ( ) Ksh 71,000 and above Section II: Observation/opinion/recommendation 6. In our View, how do you rate COP in Umoja A. Excellent (5)

B. Very good (4) C. Good D. Average E. Poor (3) (2) (1)

7. Does the manner in which police relate with the public affect COP? A. Yes ( ) B. No ( ) C. Not sure ( ) D. Dont know ( ) 8. If yes to what extent? A. Very large (5) B. large C. Average D. Low E. Very low (4) (3) (2) (1)

9. Do you think community based policing has improved the security of the area? 26

Yes ( ) no ( ) Explain--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------10. Do you think community based policing has improved the security of the area? Yes ( ) no ( ) Explain---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

27