June 2014 This publication was produced at the request of the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared independently by NORC at the University of Chicago. EVALUATION Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | i YES YOUTH CAN! IMPACT EVALUATION FINAL REPORT June 2014 Contract No.: AID-615-C-13-00002 DISCLAIMER The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation was a process that would not have been possible without the hard work and dedication of many people. First and foremost, we would like to thank the survey respondents who generously offered their time to participate in our focus groups, interviews, and surveys. During the design phase, Munira Sherif and Fred Opundo of dTS provided invaluable support and collaboration. Our partners at TNS Global did an excellent job of handling a challenging data collection assignment. We would like to thank Melissa Baker, Geoffrey Kimani, and Kethi Mullei for overseeing the process, Nkatha Mutiga for her help with baseline data collection, Purity Mwaura for her work on the follow up surveys, Carolyne Nijihia for her work on the qualitative reports, and John Olum, who managed the database. At USAID, we thank Mark Meassick, with whom the Yes Youth Can! Evaluation originated, who encouraged us to think creatively about the evaluation. We also thank Ryan Raleigh, who was a pleasure to work with as our main point of contact throughout most of the evaluation process and whose hard work kept the evaluation running smoothly, and Theresa Herscovitz, who ably took over following Ryan’s departure to see the evaluation through to its conclusion. In addition, we thank the YYC project team for providing useful feedback and information throughout the process. Finally, we thank the YYC implementing partners at Mercycorps, CLUSA International, Winrock, World Vision, and Inuka Trust for their support in the data collection process and during our field visits. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | iii CONTENTS Acronyms............................................................................................................................................................................ vi Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................................... vii Introduction and Background .........................................................................................................................vii Methodology .......................................................................................................................................................vii Findings and Conclusions ................................................................................................................................viii Caveats and Future Directions ........................................................................................................................ x 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................. 1 2. Background .................................................................................................................................................................. 2 3. Methodology................................................................................................................................................................ 5 i. Research Questions .................................................................................................................................... 6 ii. Methodology for Impact Evaluation Component ................................................................................ 6 iii. Methodology for Analysis of impact of Bunge Characteristics ........................................................ 8 iv. Qualitative Component ............................................................................................................................. 9 v. Data Collection Process ............................................................................................................................ 9 Quantitative Data Collection ........................................................................................................ 9 Qualitative Data Collection ......................................................................................................... 10 Overview of Data .......................................................................................................................... 11 4. Findings/Conclusions/ Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 14 i. Demographics, Program Experiences, and Stakeholder Views ...................................................... 14 Bunge Activity ................................................................................................................................. 15 Bunge Member and Stakeholder Views on YYC .................................................................... 16 ii. Economic Opportunities ......................................................................................................................... 20 Impact Evaluation Findings ........................................................................................................... 21 Qualitative/Descriptive Findings ................................................................................................. 21 iii. Political Empowerment and Inclusion .................................................................................................. 25 Impact Evaluation Findings ........................................................................................................... 25 Qualitative/Descriptive Findings ................................................................................................. 27 iv. Trust and Social Capital ........................................................................................................................... 28 Impact Evaluation Findings ........................................................................................................... 29 Qualitative/Descriptive Findings ................................................................................................. 29 v. Attitudes/Behaviors towards Ethnicity and Violence........................................................................ 30 Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | iv Impact Evaluation Findings ........................................................................................................... 31 Qualitative/Descriptive Findings ................................................................................................. 31 vi. Self-Efficacy.................................................................................................................................................. 32 Impact Evaluation Findings ........................................................................................................... 33 Qualitative/Descriptive Findings ................................................................................................. 34 vii. Differentiated Impacts by Gender and Poverty Status ..................................................................... 35 viii. Findings from analysis of Impact of Bunge Characteristics .............................................................. 37 ix. Conclusions and Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 37 5. Issues, Caveats, and Limitations ............................................................................................................................ 40 6. Future Directions ..................................................................................................................................................... 42 Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | v LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Baseline vs. Endline Interviews Completed (% is of baseline) .......................................10 Table 2: Sampling Distribution for Focus Group Discussions ......................................................11 Table 3: Sampling Distribution for In-depth Interviews, YYC Participants and Implementers ...11 Table 4: Sampling Distribution for In-depth Interviews, Broader YYC Stakeholders ..................11 Table 5: Observations by Region ................................................................................................. 12 Table 6: Bunge Member demographics ......................................................................................14 Table 7: Member Opinions on Mobilizers and Implementing Partners ......................................17 Table 8: Member Views of the YYC Funding Process and Trainings ...........................................18 Table 9: Economic Opportunities ................................................................................................21 Table 10a: Political Empowerment and Inclusion ...........................................................................25 Table 10b: Political Empowerment and Inclusion, cont’d...............................................................26 Table 11: Trust and Social Capital ................................................................................................. 29 Table 12: Attitudes/Behaviors towards ethnicity and violence ....................................................31 Table 13: The Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale ...............................................................................33 Table 14: Self Efficacy ....................................................................................................................33 Table 15: Differential Impacts for Women and the Poor ..............................................................36 LIST OF EXHIBITS Figure 1: Key Development Hypothesis .......................................................................................... 4 Figure 2: Bunge Member Rating of Bunge Leaders ......................................................................20 Figure 3: Percent who said bunge was helpful in their employment in the following ways: ......23 Figure 4: Percent who said bunge was helpful with growing crops in the following ways: .........23 Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | vi ACRONYMS FGD focus group discussions GSES Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale IDI In-depth Interviews IP implementing partner KII key informant interview MP Member of Parliament PEV post-election violence PSM propensity score matching RCT Randomized Control Trial SACCO Savings and Credit Cooperatives YYC Yes Youth Can USAID United States Agency for International Development Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Yes Youth Can! (YYC) is a 3-year, $55m program funded by USAID to promote youth empowerment in Kenya. The goal of YYC is to address the underlying social, economic, and political factors that drive youth marginalization in Kenya. In so doing, YYC seeks to affect a range of outcomes related to these factors, as well as to prevent a recurrence of the violence that followed the 2007 elections in Kenya, in which youth played a significant role. In accordance with the learning and accountability objectives described in USAID’s Evaluation Policy, YYC includes an independent impact evaluation implemented by NORC at the University of Chicago to assess the impact of the program on the outcomes it seeks to influence. The evaluation process began with development of the design and baseline survey carried out during the first half of 2012, with an endline survey and analysis in late 2013 and early 2014. This report presents the findings of the impact evaluation. 1 YYC’s approach is to work with young people in communities to organize themselves into groups called “bunges.” These bunges are formed for a variety of purposes according to the activities that the youths themselves wish to pursue, ranging from income-generating activities to community service and arts. Once established, bunges can solicit funding from YYC to pursue their activities. YYC also provides training and sensitization activities to bunge members that cover topics such as leadership, entrepreneurship, and life skills. In addition, YYC includes the creation of a county and national bunge structure, along with a youth-oriented think tank to engage in policy-related research. During the course of the project, YYC also worked to involve bunges in national campaigns related to expanding access to national identity cards, and preventing post-election violence following the 2013 presidential elections. The target population of YYC is youths between the ages of 18 and 35, and the program was implemented in a range of areas in Kenya that were identified as being at particularly high risk for post￾election violence. The theory of change behind YYC is multifaceted. Benefits are expected to arise not only from the funding provided to bunges, but no less importantly through the process of participating in YYC. By working together in a group towards a common goal, YYC fosters the development of leadership skills and self-confidence. Moreover, the bunge system is intended to provide a voice for youth that increases political empowerment and engagement, and improve relations between youths and others in the community. The evaluation thus considers the impact of the program on a broad range of outcomes divided into five categories: economic opportunities, political empowerment and inclusion, trust and social capital, attitudes/behaviors towards ethnicity and violence, and self- efficacy. METHODOLOGY There are three components to the methodology. The first of these is a rigorous impact evaluation, which seeks to measure the causal impact of YYC on outcomes for the beneficiaries. The impact evaluation compares outcomes for YYC participants to outcomes for a comparison group of non￾beneficiaries intended to represent the counterfactual- i.e. what would have happened to the YYC participants in the absence of the program. The impact evaluation uses the statistical techniques of panel data modeling in conjunction with propensity score matching to obtain rigorous quantitative estimates of impact. 1 This report was the joint effort of many staff at NORC, including Kareem Kysia (Survey Director), Yvonne Cao, Sam Haddaway, Tasha Heidenrich, and Mawadda Damon (Analysts), and Ben Linkow (Evaluation Specialist and Project Director). Any questions regarding this report should be directed to Dr. Linkow at linkow-benjamin@norc.org. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | viii The evaluation also includes a quantitative analysis of the impact of bunge characteristics. Because of YYC’s youth-driven approach, there was significant variation in terms of the activities and purposes of bunges, which aspects of the program they participated in, and other characteristics related to the program. This portion of the analysis thus uses rigorous statistical methods to examine how these differences in experiences under the program impacted outcomes for the bunge members, with a focus on what lessons could be drawn for future programming. The rigorous impact evaluation and analysis of the impact of bunge characteristics makes use of a longitudinal household survey dataset collected specifically for the evaluation. At baseline in 2012, a sample of 667 bunges was drawn roughly in proportion to the total number of bunges in each of the six regions. A total of 6,370 members of those bunges were interviewed along with a sample of 3,216 youths from comparison areas. The youth survey includes information on demographic and other characteristics, experiences with YYC, as well as a range of measures of each of the five outcome categories. A separate survey was administered to leaders of each of the 667 bunges to capture information at the bunge level. At endline, the same bunge members, comparison youths, and bunge leaders were re-contacted and re-interviewed where possible using a similar survey instrument. The final sample that was interviewed at both baseline and endline consisted of 569 bunges, 4,581 bunge members, and 1,969 comparison youths. Finally, the impact evaluation includes an extensive qualitative analysis. This analysis uses data from 48 Focus Groups Discussions (FGDs) and 98 In-Depth Interviews (IDIs) with YYC participants and a range of other stakeholders including implementers, other members of YYC communities, members of civil society, etc. The purpose of the qualitative analysis is to provide greater depth and explanation to the quantitative findings, as well as illustrations of program results through individual experiences. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The key findings of the evaluation are as follows: Bunges tended to remain active and engaged throughout the evaluation period. Over the year-and-a-half period between our surveys, over 80% of the bunges interviewed at baseline were still active. The majority of these were continuing to meet bi-weekly or more often, and on average bunges did not experience significant reductions in the number of members or the percentage of these who attended meetings regularly. YYC improved relations between youth and their communities. Though negative perceptions of youths by other segments of the community remain a concern, our results indicate that YYC was effective in improving the situation. The program also led to a statistically significant increase in the tendency of participants to express trust in their communities. YYC was successful in terms of increasing participants’ self confidence and self-esteem. We find a statistically significant impact of the program on participants’ scores on the Generalized Self￾Efficacy Scale (GSES), a psychometric tool used to measure self-esteem and self-confidence in a variety of cultural contexts. Focus group discussions with participants echoed this finding, as youth indicated that YYC improved their confidence, attitudes towards one another, and belief in their ability to accomplish their goals, for example: “…it really helped me to really talk to people and to believe…to see something in myself that I really did not … I can do something. I can do anything if I put my mind to it” [Female National Bunge Member, Central Region] YYC led to some improvements in political engagement, but youths continue to feel alienated by political elites and the political system. As a result of YYC, participants were 11.5% more likely to report that friends and neighbors take their views about politics seriously. Qualitative findings suggest that YYC was important in fostering civic engagement, promoting more informed Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | ix political views, and facilitating engagement with political leaders in some cases. However, youths continue to view politicians as generally unresponsive to the needs of youth and our quantitative measures of engagement with political actors and the political process did not show a significant impact of the program. The impact of YYC on economic outcomes was limited. Our empirical analysis finds no impact of the program on household incomes, and only a small increase in wealth as measured by asset ownership. Program participants recognized the potential of bunges to increase incomes by enabling members to organize and coordinate their activities. However, in practice most participants did not view the bunge as having been helpful in generating incomes and many were disappointed in this respect. Ultimately, economic activities related to the bunges do not appear to have been sufficient to overcome key constraints that youths identified such as lack of formal employment activities, inability to access credit and high costs of starting a business, as well as lack of required technical and managerial expertise. However, as discussed below, the timeframe of the evaluation may be too short for the economic impacts of the program to be captured. Important sources of benefits from YYC were the skills and lessons derived from the process of participating in the bunge. Our analysis of bunge-level characteristics suggests that factors associated with a higher level of engagement with the program (such as participation in national initiatives, high rates of attendance at meetings, etc.) led to improved outcomes for members. Conversely, the specific purpose or activities of the bunge did not have a strong impact on outcomes. The implication is that, as the YYC program design anticipated, the experience of participating in the process of coming together and working towards a common goal led to important benefits for the youth who participated. Thus, future programming related to youth groups like bunges could prioritize facilitating higher levels of engagement within the group. Youth groups such as bunges could benefit from “mentoring” relationships with respected members of the community. Youth expressed a desire for a higher level of guidance, engagement, and advice concerning bunge activities. YYC used respected community members as “mobilizers” in the early stages of the program, and youth appreciated the role these mobilizers played and expressed the view that their continued engagement would have been helpful. A need was also expressed for mentors to help youth interact with implementing partners and others in the community. An implication for further youth-related programming is that engaging with respected community members such as the YYC mobilizers can be an effective means of both conducting outreach about the program, and facilitating communication between youths and other stakeholders. Youths perceived the trainings they received as part of YYC to be a particularly valuable aspect of the program. In terms of their views about the program, participants expressed particularly positive views about the trainings they received through YYC. Youths overwhelmingly indicated that they would have liked to receive more trainings related to income-generating activities (89%) and leadership and organization (90%); providing these types of trainings could thus be a focus of future programming. Post-election violence was minimal throughout Kenya following the 2013 presidential elections, which was a major goal of YYC. While our evaluation is not able to rigorously determine the role that YYC played in preventing violence, our qualitative data shows that program participants and other stakeholders viewed YYC as making an important contribution, for example: “We did a peace campaign also, so the youth demonstrated that they want peace during the elections… I believe that’s why there was no violence reported during the elections. So, I can say the YYC did a good job.” [Male County Bunge Member, Central Region] “… in our group we are people of different tribes, so now that we are joined we can’t allow another tribe to be hurt in our group. For me it’s like my sister or my brother. So we sat and taught ourselves Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | x even the issue of youths being used by politicians when we are together like now we don’t want. Even if we are called somewhere in a meeting with a politician… we cannot be separated either by tribe or color, we are all the same.” [Female Bunge Leader, Coast Region] The evaluation should not be interpreted as discounting the possibility that YYC played an instrumental role in preventing post-election violence in 2013, which is seen as a major accomplishment of the program by the YYC Technical Team. Because we cannot evaluate this hypothesis rigorously, however, we do not emphasize it as a major finding. CAVEATS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS In interpreting these findings, some caveats and limitations of the analysis should be borne in mind. First, the timeframe of the evaluation may be insufficient for the full impact of the program to be captured. Outcomes have been evaluated over a period of 18 months, but the program is still ongoing and bunges continue to pursue their activities. In fact, because of changes to the YYC program’s approach, in many ways the bunges are still in very early stages. First, the scale of the YYC program’s reach was expanded significantly from the original design, in order to reach as many youth as possible, and a significant amount of time and effort was spent on membership outreach to youth during the first year of the program. Furthermore, during the first year, another key YYC’s focus was on organizational building (referred to as “activity zero,”) - training and empowering the bunges to choose their focus and activities (the youth-led model) and creating a county and national bunge (parliament) system. Therefore, bunges are still in the early stages in terms of carrying out activities that benefit members. Additionally, a major programmatic shift in YYC occurred during the first year- the YYC-National Tahidi grant program was ended and devolved to the county level, where the youth formed SACCO’s to receive YYC grants. This was positive in the sense that it was in response to youth demands, but in terms of impacts this change slowed the economic impacts (perceived and actual) we could expect from YYC as the funding process for bunges was slowed considerably. Further program implementation activities following the evaluation period will not be reflected in the findings, and the evaluation may also miss impacts on outcomes that unfold more slowly over time. Secondly, while our findings can be taken as evidence of the causal impact of the program, there are some weaknesses to the causal models used in the evaluation that should be noted. Because implementation did not follow a randomized controlled trial (RCT) framework (as well as some additional issues related to implementation discussed in Section 5), we cannot be certain that our comparison group is an accurate representation of the counterfactual. The evaluation methodology uses statistical techniques to control for other factors and isolate the causal impact to the greatest extent possible, and we can be confident in the main findings of the evaluation. However, we cannot conclusively rule out the possibility that our empirical results might be driven to some extent by other factors in addition to the impact of the program. Further research could consist of additional analysis of the data to investigate the validity of the causal model and findings. This could include alternative modelling specifications in order to investigate the validity of the causal model, data imputation for item non-response, and attrition analysis. Given the richness of the dataset, further research could also focus on a more detailed investigation of specific hypotheses related to the program. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 1 1. INTRODUCTION The Yes Youth Can! (YYC) Program is a three-year, US$55m USAID initiative to promote youth empowerment in Kenya. By addressing the root causes of social and economic marginalization among young people, YYC seeks to prevent a recurrence of the widespread violence that followed the 2007 presidential election in Kenya. In pursuit of the learning and accountability goals defined in the USAID Evaluation Policy, USAID/Kenya has included a rigorous external impact evaluation as part of YYC. The design of the evaluation and collection of the baseline data was carried out by NORC at the University of Chicago in partnership with Development & Training Services, Inc. (dTS) between March and September 2012 for a total contract amount of $175,158. Follow up data collection and analysis for the final report was carried out under a separate contract with NORC at the University of Chicago between September 2013 and March 2014 for a total contract amount of $706,781. Both the quantitative and qualitative data collection were conducted by NORC’s local sub-contracting data collection firm, TNS, with direction and oversight by NORC, for both baseline and endline data. The impact evaluation is aimed at addressing both the Accountability and Learning objectives as laid out in the USAID Evaluation Policy, and will be used by USAID YYC staff in order to inform future programming in YYC in Kenya and beyond. It uses rigorous statistical methods to compare outcomes for YYC beneficiaries to a counterfactual, and provides evidence of causal impact of the program along the following dimensions: 1) Economic opportunities, 2) Political empowerment and inclusion, 3) Trust and social capital, 4) Attitudes/behaviors towards ethnicity and violence, and 5) Self-efficacy By providing an unbiased, external assessment of the program, the evaluation serves to strengthen USAID’s accountability to its stakeholders to produce tangible results. In addition, the evaluation uses rigorous statistical methods as well as evidence from in-depth interviews and focus group discussions to draw programmatic lessons of relevance to other USAID youth programs around the world. This Final Evaluation Report presents the findings of the evaluation, and is organized as follows. Section II provides background on the project and elaborates the theory of change behind the Yes Youth Can! program, while Section III describes the methodology used in the evaluation. Findings and conclusions are presented in Section IV, outstanding issues detailed in Section V, and Section VI outlines possible directions for future research. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 2 2. BACKGROUND At the time YYC was initiated in 2011, it was the largest youth program in USAID’s history, and as of mid-2012 had reached nearly one million youth in Kenya2 . The program is expected to run through 2015, although the goal is that bunges and the county and national bunge system remain self-sustaining after official program end. YYC has been implemented in a range of areas in Kenya, which initially included both urban and rural areas in Nairobi, Central, Coast, Nyanza, and Rift Valley Provinces. YYC subsequently expanded to North Eastern Province as well.3 The concept of YYC begins with the observation that youth marginalization played an important role in contributing to the widespread post-election violence (PEV) that Kenya experienced following the 2007 elections. YYC seeks to address the underlying political, economic, and social factors that have led to a situation of youth marginalization in Kenya. In so doing, YYC aims to improve the lives of youths along a number of dimensions, as well as to prevent recurrences of political violence with particular attention to the 2013 presidential elections. YYC’s target population is youths between the ages of 18 and 35, with a focus on areas believed to be at high risk for PEV in 20134. YYC’s approach is to work in communities with young people to help them organize themselves into groups called “bunges,” and YYC included a significant youth outreach component. Each village bunge is formed around a particular purpose that is determined by the participating youths on the basis of their own needs and interests. The purposes of the bunges vary widely, and include income-generating activities related to agriculture and small businesses, informal savings clubs (or “table banking”), as well as community service and arts. Once established, bunges can solicit funding from YYC to pursue their activities. A key focus of YYC, especially in the first year, was on organization building of the bunges, including training in organizational management and democratic organizational practices (roll call, elections, bunge constitutions, etc.). YYC also provides training and sensitization activities to bunge members that cover topics such as leadership, entrepreneurship, and life skills. In addition to the village bunges, YYC includes broader activities as well. The village bunges select representatives to participate in county-level bunges, and leaders of the county-level bunges also comprise a bunge that represents the bunge system at the national level. Another important YYC focus was the Tuko Rada peace movement YYC helped to create, which included not only the large peace festival event , but involved a “training of trainers” of 600 board members in how to prevent post￾election violence, and a crowd-sourcing platform, and road shows. YYC also involved bunges in two national campaigns. The first of these was the “My ID, My Life” program, which sought to expand access to national identity cards. Bunges were involved in promotion and outreach related to My ID, My Life targeted towards youths and other members of the community. Bunges also played a role in the “Early Warning, Early Response” violence prevention program. This was a program designed to quickly identify and contain any outbreaks of violence following the 2013 presidential elections to prevent them from escalating into a larger scale. The process by which bunges obtain funding from YYC evolved over the course of the program. Initially, bunges that met a number of organizational criteria such as registering themselves and opening a bank account were eligible to apply for grants. These grants were administered through a national facility set up by YYC called the Tahidi Youth Fund. However, the Tahidi Youth Fund encountered some challenges 2 USAID/Kenya Yes Youth Can! Fact Sheet 3 The present evaluation covers YYC’s activities in the five original provinces. A separate evaluation considers YYC’s activities in North Eastern Province. 4 The Evaluation Team is not aware of any competing projects that were occurring simultaneously that could have affected implementation of YYC Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 3 and quickly came to be perceived negatively by bunge members. As a result of feedback from the youth on this issue, YYC adapted its approach and funding was devolved to the county level. The new approach was to work with bunge members to form Savings and Credit Cooperatives (SACCOs), with bunge members eligible to receive matching funds for their savings within the SACCO. The theory of change that underlies YYC is multifaceted. In seeking to address the underlying causes of youth marginalization, YYC is intended to impact a broad range of outcomes. Benefits are expected to arise not only from the funding provided to bunges, but no less importantly through the process of participating in YYC. By working together in a group towards a common goal, YYC fosters the development of leadership skills and self-confidence. Moreover, the bunge system is intended to provide a voice for youth that increases political empowerment and engagement, and improves relations between youths and others in the community. 1. Because of the complex and multifaceted nature of the program, during the design phase the Evaluation Team devoted significant attention to identifying the appropriate set of outcomes to measure that would capture the full spectrum of impacts as comprehensively as possible. This included a process of fieldwork and extensive discussions with USAID, implementing partners, and program participants. This process identified the following five categories of outcomes around which the evaluation is structured: Economic opportunities: many of the instances of PEV in 2007 involved political operatives paying youths to participate in political violence. Youths were willing to accept these arrangements in part because of un- or under-employment. Without alternative means of earning income, the payments from political operatives are more attractive, and the opportunity cost of participating is less. By contrast, youths who have alternative means of earning an income will be less prone to accept payment to participate in political violence. In addition, greater economic opportunities create more of a stake in the future for youth, and thus may lead to attitudinal changes away from those that promote destructive political violence. 2. Political empowerment and inclusion: another source of youth marginalization is the sense that youth are excluded from the current political process and powerless to influence political actors. YYC addresses this by creating opportunities for youths to exercise autonomy and leadership through the bunge system. This “learning by doing” aspect of YYC creates a sense of empowerment and civic engagement that should lead to changes in bunge participants’ views on these matters. In particular, we expect YYC to positively impact participants’ sense of their own ability to effect change through the political system as well as a greater tendency to engage with government on matters of concern to them and to see the possibility for doing so. 3. Trust and social capital: Participation in YYC should result in more cohesive community structures and a greater sense of inclusion in those structures on the part of youth, particularly across ethnic lines. We expect to see this outcome realized in terms of youths tending to go on and join further groups in addition to the bunge, particularly in leadership roles, as well as reporting different views of the cohesiveness of their communities. 4. Attitudes/behaviors towards ethnicity and violence: Another important set of outcomes is the extent to which the youth who participate in the program are sensitized to issues related to ethnicity and violence, and exhibit changes in their views and behavior related to these issues. 5. Self-efficacy: A final set of outcomes relates to the psychological dimensions of participating in the bunge. During our fieldwork, a number of respondents indicated that one of the benefits to them of participating in the bunge was that it improved their overall self-confidence and sense of social inclusion. To capture these kinds of impacts we thus include in the questionnaire an instrument called the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES), which has been used in a variety of cultural contexts to measure self-esteem and self-empowerment (see further discussion below). Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 4 The key development hypothesis and causal model of YYC that informs the evaluation is illustrated in Figure 1. The YYC program is intended to effect change in attitudes and behavior towards ethnicity and violence directly, as well as through addressing the underlying causes of youth alienation and marginalization that give rise to violent behavior. Figure 1: Key Development Hypothesis Change in attitudes/ behavior towards ethnicity and violence YYC Activities  Increased economic opportunity  Improved political empowerment and inclusion  Greater trust and social capital  Improved self-efficacy Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 5 3. METHODOLOGY The Yes Youth Can! Evaluation includes three components. The first of these is an impact evaluation designed to measure the causal impact of YYC on a range of outcomes. This methodology includes a rigorous design that incorporates a counterfactual, and thus meets the definition of an impact evaluation as laid out in the USAID Evaluation Policy. Secondly, the evaluation includes an additional analysis of the impact of bunge characteristics. This component is designed to draw programmatic lessons consistent with the learning objective of the USAID evaluation policy. Finally, the evaluation includes qualitative data collected through focus group discussions and key informant interviews in order to incorporate the views of program participants and other stakeholders in their own words, and provide further depth to the findings. In the remainder of this section, we first present our research questions. We then elaborate on the methodologies for the three components, followed by a brief description of the data collection process used for the data that these methodologies utilize. The evaluation covers a period of approximately 18 months, from mid- 2012 (baseline data collection began in July and ended in September) to late 2013/early 2014 (data collection began in November 2013 and ended in February 2014). Finally, due to the complex and interwoven nature of the program components, the local culture, and local politics, the results herein are highly contextual and localized, and we would caution against expecting similar results in another geographic or cultural setting, though the general lessons may be applicable. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 6 I. RESEARCH QUESTIONS The evaluation is organized around five research questions corresponding to the five categories of outcomes described in the previous section. The research questions are designed to investigate the causal impacts of the program on outcomes, as well as the ways in which differences in bunge characteristics and experiences under the program affect outcomes as follows: 1. Does participating in YYC and/or participating in bunges with particular characteristics lead to improved economic outcomes? If so, how? What bunge characteristics are particularly important in this regard? 2. Does participating in YYC lead to closer engagement with government and political leaders? Do YYC youths experience a greater sense of political empowerment in terms of their beliefs about their own capacity to effect meaningful and peaceful change through the political system? What characteristics of bunges lead to differences in outcomes in this regard? 3. Does YYC lead to greater social inclusion for youths in the broader community, particularly across ethnic lines? Does YYC foster leadership qualities that are reflected in behavior extending beyond the project itself? 4. Have attitudes towards violence and ethnicity changed on the part of youths who participate in YYC? What are the characteristics of bunges that are more or less effective in terms of influencing this outcome? In practice, has YYC reduced the incidence of post-election violence following the 2012-3 presidential elections? 5. Does YYC have a positive impact on psychological outcomes such as self-efficacy and relatedness to others for participants? What are the characteristics of bunges that are particularly successful or unsuccessful in this regard? Further discussion of the particular variables that are considered in addressing the research questions as well as details related to measurement are presented along with the findings in Section 4. II. METHODOLOGY FOR IMPACT EVALUATION COMPONENT The first component of the evaluation is a rigorous impact evaluation designed to measure the causal impact of the program on outcomes. As defined in the USAID Evaluation Policy, “Impact evaluations measure the change in a development outcome that is attributable to a defined intervention; impact evaluations are based on models of cause and effect and require a credible and rigorously defined counterfactual to control for factors other than the intervention that might account for the observed change.”5 The central challenge for any impact evaluation is to be able to credibly claim to isolate the causal impact of the program. The challenge arises because in most cases, the outcomes that an intervention seeks to affect are determined in part by factors other than the intervention that can be difficult to disentangle from the effects of the program. For example, an intervention might seek to impact agricultural yields by providing access to new seed varieties. However, agricultural yields will also be affected by a range of other factors, including weather, prices, availability of inputs, skills and motivation of the farmer, etc. Yields can be measured before and after the program, but the challenge is to determine the extent to which any observed change can be attributed to the project as opposed to these other factors. 5 USAID Evaluation Policy, p. 1, retrieved from http://www.usaid.gov/evaluation/policy Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 7 Impact evaluations typically seek to address the issue of attribution by comparing outcomes for program beneficiaries to those of a comparison (or control) group of non-beneficiaries. The comparison group is intended to represent the counterfactual- that is, what would have happened to program beneficiaries in the absence of the program. To the extent that the comparison group is an accurate reflection of the beneficiaries in the absence of the program, comparing the two can account for any factors other than the intervention that would affect outcomes, since these other factors would have affected both groups equally. The use of a comparison group can thus provide a powerful means of establishing causality. A key consideration is in how the comparison group is chosen. The ideal approach is to use a randomized controlled trial (RCT) methodology in program implementation. In the context of YYC, this was not possible, as implementation did not include an RCT design in selecting beneficiaries for treatment. While the RCT approach is preferred, it is still possible to carry out a rigorous evaluation that identifies the causal impacts of the program if a suitable comparison group can be identified. Many evaluations take this approach, which is referred to as a “quasi-experimental design.” Our comparison group is comprised of youths drawn from locations near the YYC project areas, but where YYC has not been implemented. We selected one comparison area for each of the six project areas. Comparison areas were selected using administrative data as well as careful discussions with project staff and implementing partners in the field. The goal was to identify areas that were as similar as possible to YYC project areas, but where YYC was not anticipated to reach. Differing circumstances in each area necessitated different approaches to identifying the appropriate comparison area. Our preference was to identify neighboring counties to YYC areas, and then randomly select sub-locations bordering the YYC areas. In some cases, however, this approach was not feasible and it was necessary to select sub-locations or villages within areas where YYC was active, but where the program had not reached. Once the comparison areas were identified, survey teams went door-to-door to identify individual youths, using standard methodologies to select a starting point and skipping algorithm to ensure an unbiased sample. Respondents were selected using a quota system to ensure that the youths who were included reflected a similar age and gender distribution as YYC participants based on the available information. Our modeling approach incorporates both panel data methods and propensity score matching (PSM). Panel data methods such as fixed or random effects models are used to control for certain types of selection bias when multiple rounds of data have been collected from the same respondents, as is the case with our survey. PSM is a widely used technique that can improve the comparability of the treatment and comparison groups by assigning greater weight to control observations that exhibit closer similarity to the treatment group and vice versa6 , and in so doing eliminates additional sources of selection bias. We combine panel data methods and PSM by first using PSM to trim the sample, and then estimating a panel data regression model. The first step is to estimate a regression model of the probability that a particular observation is part of the treatment group as a function of observable characteristics. The predicted probabilities are then calculated for each observation, and comparison observations with particularly low probabilities and/or treatment observations with particularly high probabilities are dropped from the sample. A variety of criteria have been used to establish which observations to drop, and based on experimentation with several such methods we dropped the most dissimilar 10% of 6 A full discussion of these approaches can be found in: Paul J. Gertler, Sebastian Martinez, Patrick Premand, Laura B. Rawlings, and Christel M. J. Vermeersch,( 2011) "Impact Evaluation in Practice," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, Number 2550. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 8 observations from the treatment and comparison groups, respectively. After dropping these observations, we estimate a random effects7 panel regression model as follows: (i) ( ) Where: is outcome Y for individual i at time t is a vector of control variables is a time dummy equal to one at endline is a dummy equal to one for the treatment group is an individual-level random effect is a random error term The are parameters to be estimated, and is estimate of the average treatment effect Equation (i) is estimated using linear regression for continuous outcomes and probit for binary outcomes. As control variables, we use a range of characteristics in the data that we might expect to have some influence over outcomes. These are: age, gender, education level, dummy variables for whether the youth is the main income earner in their household and whether their household has ever migrated, and a set of region-level dummies. The impact evaluation component of the design is particularly important from the standpoint of the USAID Evaluation Policy’s accountability objective. An unbiased, independent assessment of the changes in outcomes brought about by the project provides a means for stakeholders to hold USAID accountable for demonstrating results. In addition, where evaluation findings are positive, they allow USAID to be able to highlight the successes and accomplishments of its programs with the additional credibility that comes from an independent evaluation. III. METHODOLOGY FOR ANALYSIS OF IMPACT OF BUNGE CHARACTERISTICS While estimating treatment effects in the context of the impact evaluation framework described above is important from an accountability standpoint, the evaluation also includes a separate line of analysis focused on the important opportunity that YYC presents from a learning standpoint. Within the YYC framework, there is a tremendous amount of variation in terms of the specific nature of the intervention that program participants experienced. For example, youth bunges were formed for a wide range of purposes, from economic activities to social and civic functions. In addition, bunges vary considerably in terms of a variety of different characteristics, for example size, means of generating revenue, frequency of meetings, etc. To the extent that these variations in program design and experiences can be linked to differences in outcomes, an understanding of these relationships would provide a rich source of programmatic lessons for other programs and contexts. The quantitative component in this section estimates random effects regression models similar to those in the previous section using the sample of YYC participants to investigate how different characteristics affected outcomes differently. Our approach is to interact the characteristic of interest with a round 2 dummy variable in order to investigate whether the change in each of our outcomes was affected by that 7 Our use of a random effects specification as opposed to fixed effects is motivated by the fact that almost all of our outcome variables are binary. Chamberlain’s conditional logit model can be used to estimate a fixed effects model for binary dependent variables, but the magnitude of the coefficients does not have a ready interpretation. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 9 characteristic. We estimate a separate regression model for each characteristic of interest to avoid multicolinearity issues8. Our model is thus: (ii) ( ) Where: is outcome Y for individual i at time t is a vector of control variables as above is a time dummy equal to one at endline is the characteristic of interest for individual i and time t is an individual-level random effect is a random error term The are parameters to be estimated, and is estimate of the effect of the characteristic cit on endline outcomes As before, equation (ii) is estimated using linear regression for continuous outcomes and probit for binary outcomes. We estimate model (ii) using a wide range of different characteristics of interest cit. These include: characteristics related to participation in county and national bunge structures; program characteristics such as membership in bunge-specific SACCOs, whether the bunge received various types of trainings from YYC, and the type of bunge; we also examine other aspects of the bunges including revenue generation, whether issues of various types were regularly discussed at bunge meetings, frequency of meetings, size of the bunge, members’ view of the performance of bunge leadership, involvement of the mobilizer, and whether the bunge was a pre-existing group prior to YYC. A complete list of the cit is shown with the full presentation of the results in the annex. IV. QUALITATIVE COMPONENT Finally the evaluation includes a qualitative component designed to provide greater depth and explanation to the quantitative analyses in both the impact evaluation and analysis of the variation in bunge characteristics. The qualitative component included focus group discussions with bunge members, other members of YYC communities, and youths in comparison areas, as well as key informant interviews with a wide range of stakeholders. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed using the DEDOOSE qualitative data analysis software package. The key findings from this analysis are presented in the next section along with the empirical results. A more thorough analysis of the qualitative data is included as an annex. V. DATA COLLECTION PROCESS Quantitative Data Collection Both qualitative data and quantitative data were collected for the evaluation. The quantitative data consisted of survey data, under three distinct categories: (1) surveys of bunge leaders, (2) surveys of bunge members, and (3) surveys of non-bunge youth, i.e. the comparison group. SAMPLING: For the baseline bunge leader and member surveys, NORC provided our local data collection partner TNS Global with a sample of 670 bunges that were selected from comprehensive lists of bunges received from the implementing partners (IPs). For each bunge, the sample included the bunge name, locating information such as region and village, and the name and phone number(s) of the bunge 8 The one exception is in our analysis of the influence of the type of bunge on outcomes, where we include all of bunge type variables in a single model. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 10 leader(s). TNS team leaders located a bunge leader (a chairperson, vice-chairperson, secretary, or treasurer) and interviewed him or her. Part of this interview included generating a list of all bunge members, from which ten bunge members were randomly selected to be interviewed using a skip interval. For both the bunge leader and member surveys, a minimum of three contact attempts were required before a replacement was used. Replacement bunges were provided to TNS by NORC, and replacements were made based on proximity to the bunge being replaced. Bunge members were replaced by randomly selecting additional respondents within the same bunge. For both leader and member endline surveys, TNS interviewers contacted the same respondents that were interviewed in the baseline. For the bunge leader surveys, if the leadership of the bunge changed, the new leader was interviewed (since it was bunge level information we were primarily interested in, and not information related to the individuals themselves). For the bunge member surveys, however, the exact same respondent from the baseline was required, and every effort was made (up to five contact attempts) to find the respondent; if the same respondent was unwilling to be interviewed or could not be located, they were not replaced but were dropped from the study. TRAINING AND DATA COLLECTION: A total of 130 field personnel and 36 people from the Quality Control team were trained on the endline survey in Nairobi from November 5-7, 2013. Following the training, a pilot test was carried out with 7 bunges on November 9th in the teams’ respective regions. Survey data collection began on November 12, 2013 and concluded on February 12, 2014. Data collectors were able to complete successful surveys with the leaders of 85% of the bunges interviewed at baseline (recall the exact same leader does not have to be interviewed, rather the current leadership of the bunge suffices). Overall, 87% of baseline youth respondents were located at endline, and of those, approximately 79% were successfully surveyed, resulting in a final success rate of 69% for all youth (the rate was higher for members (72%) than non-members (61%), as shown in Table 1, below). Less than 5% of the respondents (including leaders) that were contacted directly refused to be surveyed, and nearly all surveys that were started were completed. Table 1 shows a comparison of the baseline sample versus the endline sample for the survey. Table 1: Baseline vs. Endline Interviews Completed (% is of baseline) Interview type Baseline Endline Bunge leader surveys 667 569 (85%) Bunge member surveys 6,370 4,581 (72%) Non-bunge member surveys 3,216 1,969 (61%) Total 10,253 7,119 (70%) Qualitative Data Collection As in the baseline study, qualitative data was collected in order to obtain a deeper understanding of the experiences, views and perceptions of study participants. In addition, qualitative findings were used to address any gaps arising from the quantitative phase of the research through triangulation. Two methods were employed for the qualitative component of the YYC endline, specifically Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and In-Depth Interviews (IDIs). For the qualitative phase, data collection commenced on January 6, 2014 and was completed on January 24, 2014. FGDs were conducted with bunge groups (based on bunge activities), community members, youth in non-YYC groups, and members of dissolved bunges. A total of 48 FGDs were completed across the 6 study regions, outlined in Table 3, below. The breakdown was based on the relative numbers of YYC participants and bunge types in the respective regions. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 11 Table 2: Sampling Distribution for Focus Group Discussions Bunges Comm￾unity Compari￾son Dissolved Total Agriculture Livestock Other Income Table banking Comm. service Social Arts Community Members Non YYC Youth Dissolved Bunges Central 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 5 Coast 2 2 1 0 1 0 1 1 8 Nairobi 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 6 Nyanza 5 5 0 1 1 0 1 13 Rift Valley 4 2 0 1 1 0 1 9 Western 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 7 Total 13 11 2 4 5 1 6 4 2 48 IDIs were conducted with a variety of YYC participants and implementers, including bunge members at the local, county, and national level, mobilizers, and implementing partners. Broader stakeholders including religious leaders, representatives of civil society organizations, police and parents of YYC youth were also captured in the in-depth interviews. A total of 98 IDIs were completed across the sample (Tables 3-4). Table 3: Sampling Distribution for In-depth Interviews, YYC Participants and Implementers YYC participants and implementers # of respondents Bunge leaders, male 2 per province 12 Bunge leaders, female 2 per province 12 Members of county bunge 4 Members of national bunge 4 Implementing partner staff, key decision-makers 1 per province 6 Mobilizers 2 per province 12 USAID staff 2 Table 4: Sampling Distribution for In-depth Interviews, Broader YYC Stakeholders Broader YYC stakeholders # of respondents Religious Leaders 1 per province 6 Government officials: Councilors 2 per province 12 Government officials: Members of Parliament 2 Police 1 per province 6 Parents of participating youth 2 per province 12 Representatives of civil society organizations - local 1 per province 6 Representatives of civil society organizations - national organizations related to youth, non-violence, and/or democracy 4 Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 12 Overview of Data The survey questionnaire development was led by NORC in collaboration with TNS and USAID. The endline questionnaire largely reflected the baseline questionnaire, but the number of questions was slightly decreased, to reduce costs and respondent burden. The baseline experimented with a large number of questions as a result of the broad set of outcomes considered and difficulty in measuring some of them. The questions that were chosen for elimination based on a careful examination of the baseline data were variables that showed little variation or were highly correlated with other variables. In addition, some questions had translation issues that resulted in confusing or incorrect wording, and these questions were corrected and/or omitted as appropriate. Testing of the endline (and baseline) questionnaire was carried out by TNS during the training to uncover issues in the questionnaire language and content as well as the tablet programming, after which the questionnaire was adjusted based on results. Additionally, following the training, a pilot test was carried out with seven bunges in the teams’ respective regions, after which the questionnaire was further adjusted based on any issues that were encountered. The final versions of the endline questionnaires contained the following sections:  Individual Questionnaire Intro. Administrative Information and Respondent Consent. AA. Locating Information. A. Bunge Information: Date of membership, roles within the bunge, participation in meetings. B. Economic Outcomes: Income from bunge-related and individual income-earning activities. C. Political Empowerment and Inclusion: Participation in political activities, perceptions of politics. D. Trust and Social Capital: Participation in other social groups. E. Attitudes/Behaviors towards Ethnicity and Violence: Questions on ethnicity, attitudes towards violence. F. Self-Efficacy and Relating to Others: Self-efficacy, social activities. G. Respondent Demographics: Age, education, etc. H. Household Assets: Asset ownership. J. Interviewer Observations.  Bunge Leader Questionnaire A. Bunge Information: Bunge activities, date of formation, bunge status, trainings, etc. After receiving final datasets from TNS, NORC performed additional cleaning. Table 5 shows the data used in the final analysis, broken down by region. Table 5: Observations by Region Region Leader observations Member observations Control observations Central 46 376 122 Coast 100 880 399 Nairobi 27 255 85 Nyanza 208 1756 719 Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 13 Rift Valley 122 841 398 Western 66 473 246 Total 569 4,581 1,969 Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 14 4. FINDINGS/CONCLUSIONS/ RECOMMENDATIONS In this section, we present the findings and conclusions of the evaluation. The section is structured as follows: first, we present some descriptive and qualitative findings and background that do not speak directly to the research questions, but are nonetheless of interest in providing context and insights about the program. These include the demographic characteristics of our survey respondents, information about bunge activities and characteristics, and general stakeholder opinions related to the program. We then address each of the five outcome categories and their associated research questions in turn. For each, we first describe the outcome variables and present the empirical results from the impact evaluation, followed by qualitative and descriptive findings. We then present the results of our analysis of the impact of bunge characteristics, and finally the main conclusions that emerge from the analysis. I. DEMOGRAPHICS, PROGRAM EXPERIENCES, AND STAKEHOLDER VIEWS To provide a sense of the population the evaluation considers, Table 6 presents some basic demographic information about the YYC participants in our quantitative survey. Participants tend to be concentrated in the 24-29 age range9 (42% of respondents). Only about half have at least a secondary school education, and 43% are women. In terms of economic activity, just over half of respondents are the main income earner in their households, and reported earnings tend to be low - KSh 73,457 ($848) on average over the past 12 months. Respondents are engaged in a variety of income-generating activities, with over half working in agriculture and over half raising livestock, and 60% earning money through the bunge. Table 6: Bunge Member demographics % N Gender Male 57% 2,610 Female 43% 1,969 Age 18-23 22% 997 24-29 42% 1,879 30-34 22% 990 35 and up 13% 594 Marital status Not married 29% 1,312 Married 71% 3,229 9 Recall that for the purposes of program eligibility, YYC defines youth as between the ages of 18 and 35, while older or younger individuals may participate in bunges in a more limited way as observers. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 15 % N Education Didn't Finish Primary 10% 466 Finished Primary Only 41% 1,862 Finished Secondary 48% 2,183 Main income earner of household Myself 56% 2,570 My spouse 28% 1,272 A parent 14% 657 Another relative 1% 40 Other 0% 17 Province Central 8% 376 Coast 19% 880 Nairobi 6% 255 Nyanza 38% 1,756 Rift Valley 18% 841 Western 10% 473 Income-generating activities (last 12 months) Activities with Bunge (any) 60% 2,740 Agriculture with the bunge (as % of those earning income from bunge) 44% 1,206 Livestock with the bunge (as % of those earning income from bunge) 23% 626 Business activities with the bunge (as % of those earning income from bunge) 20% 544 Individual business activities (wage labor) 34% 1,564 Individual agriculture 55% 2,514 Individual livestock 54% 2,469 Individual business ownership 40% 1,813 Average income (last 12 months, KSh) 73,457 4,145 Bunge Activity Our survey results indicate that most bunges tended to maintain vigorous levels of activity and organization throughout the year and a half between baseline and endline surveys. Of the baseline sample of bunges, only 15% could not be re-contacted, likely because they had dissolved in many cases. Among the bunges that were re-contacted, only 3% of leaders reported that the bunge no longer intended to meet, and 84% reported that the bunge had held at least one meeting in the last 3 months, while 54% met at least bi-weekly. Furthermore, 86% had bank accounts registered to the bunge and 68% had been active in raising money for the bunge through economic activities. Bunges averaged 20.1 members at endline, as compared to 23.2 at baseline, with bunge leaders estimating that 64% of members attended more than half the meetings on average, as compared to 67% at baseline. For those who didn’t attend meetings more frequently (but were still members), the main reason they said they did not attend more often was due to scheduling conflicts (89%), rather than because they found meetings unhelpful or felt unwelcome. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 16 Rates of participation in county and national bunge activities were also high; 67% of bunges had a member who attended county forums, while 44% of respondents had attended the national Tuko Rada peace festival in person, watched it television, or listened to it on the radio. Membership remained high as 86% of those interviewed said they were still members at the time of endline survey. When those who were no longer members were asked why, over half said it was because their bunge no longer existed. Former bunge members whose bunges no longer met were asked to rate the importance of a range of factors in explaining why the bunge had failed. The most frequently cited reasons were that bunge members had joined expecting financial or other benefits, and had lost interest when those failed to materialize, with over a third of respondents citing these factors as “very important.” Our qualitative data also included focus groups with members of dissolved bunges to explore the reasons why some bunges did not succeed. Key challenges that were mentioned were the lack of capital for small business activities and a lack of financial resources to participate in the group’s activities. Members of a dissolved bunge in Nairobi admitted that they did not have the patience to sustain their bunge groups, and that their expectations for free funds may have been misguided. However, they felt that they lost morale as they did not receive adequate financial, technical or moral support from the implementing partners. Meanwhile, in other cases members reported that enrolment in university was a key reason for the bunge’s dissolution, or that they felt that their participation in the bunge was not a high priority, in light of other important needs such as education, and that they could not rely on financial support from parents for bunge-related activities. Lacking the requisite training and resources to proceed with their farming projects was also mentioned. Finally, in one case there was a perception that the YYC program was highly politicized and that politicians used the program to take advantage of the youth, though it should be noted that this view was not widely shared among other youths that were interviewed for the evaluation. Bunges tended to be able to avoid conflicts between members and with the community. Over 60% of respondents said there were “never or almost never” problems among members of the bunge that made them get angry with one another, and only 3% said these problems occurred often. Only a minority (11%) of respondents reported that others in the community had ever tried to interfere with bunge affairs, with just 1.5% indicating that such interference had posed a big problem for the bunge. Bunge Member and Stakeholder Views on YYC Our data includes a range of information about the views of YYC participants and stakeholders on various aspects of YYC including the role of implementing partners and mobilizers, program components, and bunge leaders. Overall the YYC program was felt to have provided positive outcomes for youth in a number of ways, particularly in providing youth with a platform for making their voices heard, providing them with the opportunity to interact and network with youth across the country, and to become more confident as individuals and members of their communities. In focus group discussions members of the YYC communities in Nyanza and Coast mentioned the opportunity that bunges provided youth to organize and govern themselves, and practice democracy through coordinating group elections for officer positions. Similarly, stakeholders from the civil society noted that YYC had played in instilling governance skills among the youth, enabling them to manage their groups effectively. A theme that emerges from both the quantitative and qualitative data is that members would have liked a higher level of guidance and engagement on the part of implementing partners and mobilizers. Table 7 illustrates the responses to survey questions on this issue. Over 70% of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that the bunge did not receive much guidance after it was formed. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 17 Table 7: Member Opinions on Mobilizers and Implementing Partners Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree N My bunge did not receive much guidance after the bunge was formed 6.0% 24.8% 49.5% 19.7% 4464 It would have been helpful to the bunge if the mobilizer had been more involved than s/he did after the bunge was formed 4.5% 10.0% 57.4% 28.1% 4500 It would have been helpful to the bunge if the staff of [implementing partner] had been more involved 4.0% 11.0% 54.6% 30.5% 4471 In terms of the role of the implementing partners, over 85% of bunge members agreed that a higher level of engagement would have been helpful. In focus group discussions, implementers received mixed reviews. While participants appreciated the help they received from implementers, the main complaint was dissatisfaction with the level of communication and support they received from implementing partners; they often cited a lack of consultation of youth or presence on the ground and sometimes last minute and/or unclear communication regarding events that made it difficult to plan. This was explained by one implementing partner as being due to internal bureaucracy that resulted in lengthy decision making. A recommendation from several respondents was that there should be more frequent visits to the bunges by implementers and that youth groups should have mentors who would work closely with them and provide the guidance the survey data showed was lacking, particularly related to management of their businesses. In two of the regions there was a lack of trust between implementers and participants with some concerns of corruption on the part of implementers when funding was not received by some bunges or when they felt it was awarded conditionally. A more general challenge related to implementation of the program that was raised by both USAID and the implementing partners themselves was the poor level of coordination among the multitude of implementing partners, each of whom utilized a different implementation approach. “Managing all these different partners that have different styles of doing things that receive different mandates from their headquarters wherever their headquarters are, so that becomes a challenge because sometimes you go to one region and is doing so well and you [ask], why can’t this other region replicate the same, but you find that it is not easy because of the different ways and different systems they are using to run the program, that is one big challenge” [USAID Staff member, Nairobi] At the start of the program, YYC engaged local community members called “mobilizers” to inform youth about YYC and work with them to form the bunges. These mobilizers tended to be respected and socially connected members of the community. Both the quantitative and qualitative findings suggest that continued engagement on the part of the mobilizers would have been helpful. About 85% of survey respondents agreed that the bunges could have benefited from this, and both bunge members and implementing partners voiced a generally positive view of the mobilizers, emphasizing that they played a very important role in catalyzing the program. They [mobilizers] have really, really done a lot with a voluntary spirit, they have mobilized young people to come to their network, they have organized the community to accept the YYC program, they have mobilized the government to understand exactly what is happening, they have gone straight to work with the local administration and local machinery there. Sincerely speaking these people have really done a lot to make this program at the moment to be very successful.” [National Bunge Member, Nairobi] Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 18 Table 8: Member Views of the YYC Funding Process and Trainings Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree N The way YYC! gave out funding was fair and transparent 17.3% 23.3% 41.9% 17.5% 3998 The process for getting funding through YYC! was too complex. 8.4% 25.3% 43.6% 22.8% 4042 In general, the trainings that YYC provided to bunge members were helpful 4.2% 12.2% 58.6% 25.0% 4232 The YYC! program should have offered more trainings to bunge members on income￾generating activities 2.3% 9.1% 57.1% 31.4% 4411 The YYC! program should have offered more trainings to bunge members on other topics such as leadership / organization 2.5% 7.6% 59.5% 30.5% 4449 Bunge members expressed frustration concerning the YYC funding process, with over two-thirds expressing the view that the process was too complex, and over 40% disagreeing that the process was fair and transparent. Bunge members that participated in focus groups in the Nairobi, Coast, Central, and Rift Valley regions’ main complaint was that an expectation was developed that all bunges would receive grants and when some did not, it disappointed and demotivated the youth, especially since a lack of funds was viewed as the major constraint to starting businesses. “…beginning of last year, they told us they are going to support us with a grant of KSh 40,000, many youth came because of that money but now we are being told that we are not going to be given that grant, now many youth are departing from our groups and youth bunges, saying that they came with another vision but they are not doing what they told us they are going to do for us.” [Female Bunge Leader, Nairobi] “…if you come and teach me how to start a business and I’m telling you my problem is not even starting the business because I have the idea in my mind I need funds, I need money either maybe start￾up capital or maybe to build up more stock. If you don’t give me this and you have trained me, where have you left me? Have you made me realize the vision that made me come to you?” [Community Service Bunge Member, Central Region] It is important to bear in mind that the frustrations that youth expressed may be due in part to a re￾orientation of the funding process that YYC undertook in the interests of being responsive to youth concerns. YYC’s initial approach to funding, the Tahidi fund national grants program, was terminated in response to feedback from youth. Instead, the funding mechanism was devolved to the county level with grants were given to county-level youth-led Savings and Credit Cooperatives (SACCOs). Therefore, opinions on funding may reflect the frustration with the original YYC national program, or delays in funding that occurred during this shift from national to local funding. In focus groups, bunge leaders further reported challenges in motivating youth to remain active in the group and volunteer their time and energy without a financial incentive. Many members assumed that they would be financially compensated for participating in the program and the misconception of “free” funds was perceived as a major hindrance to program success. In the Nyanza, Western, and Rift Valley regions there were some allegations of “ghost groups” that were formed only to receive money as well Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 19 as favoritism regarding which bunges received grants10. A recommendation was to continue to support youth economic empowerment by increasing the amount of funds available and disbursement of grants to bunges. In the in-depth interviews, implementing partners mainly mentioned two program challenges: the first was low education levels of youth, which restricted their ability to draft constitutions and bylaws and maintain proper records; the second was that the bunge system restricted the bunge leader to a one￾year term in office that disrupted continuity at the leadership level. One implementing partner suggested creating alternative governing practices, such as a board, to preserve bunge leadership over a longer period of time. In terms of the trainings offered by the program, the survey results (see Table 8, above) suggest a high level of demand for these trainings, as youths overwhelmingly found them helpful and would have liked to receive more. Youths expressed a nearly equal demand for both trainings related to income￾generating activities and trainings related to leadership and organization, with 89% and 90%, respectively, indicating that they would have liked YYC to provide more of these trainings. Recommendations from the focus groups and IDIs included focusing programming more on civic education and increasing the level of civic engagement of women in particular; as well as capacity building, education, and skill￾development. Bunge members tended to have mixed views about the elected bunge leaders. As illustrated in Figure 2, 20% rated the leaders as “excellent,” but 35% characterized bunge leaders as “very poor.” In focus groups with bunge members, the general sentiment was that bunge leaders performed well; the main critique raised in the Nairobi, Western, and Rift Valley regions among the minority who were dissatisfied was a feeling that bunge leaders were serving their personal interests in selecting their friends to fill positions from which they could benefit, which may help explain some of the “very poor” ratings. One mobilizer in Rift Valley further commented on the challenges that bunge leaders faced, specifically their limitations with regards to capacity and coordination skills, and the fact that the bunge leaders were not able to traverse the counties to fulfil their duties when need be. In addition, this mobilizer observed that bunge leaders did not perform as well as they should have on their own, often requiring a ‘push’ from the implementing partner to schedule group meetings: Nonetheless, the process of selecting leaders appears relatively transparent as 92% indicated that all members of the bunge had the opportunity to participate in choosing leaders. 10 It is important to note that though some focus group participants made these claims, the Evaluation Team did find any further evidence that this had taken place Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 20 Figure 2: Bunge Member Rating of Bunge Leaders II. ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES Research question: 1) Does participating in YYC and/or participating in bunges with particular characteristics lead to improved economic outcomes? If so, how? What bunge characteristics are particularly important in this regard? We include two outcomes related to economic opportunities. The first of these is household income over the previous 12 months. Survey respondents are asked how much their households earned from various activities and sources, and the results from each category are added to obtain total income. While household income is the most direct measure of economic gains, measures of income in developing country contexts using survey data are subject to high rates of error and can be unreliable. Respondents may have difficulty recalling the exact amounts they earned over a long time frame, while incomes over shorter timeframes can fluctuate substantially. In addition, respondents may be reluctant to divulge their incomes to survey enumerators. As a result, the evaluation also includes a measure of economic gains based on an index of asset ownership. Respondents are asked whether they own various assets, with the particular assets tailored to the context. For example, in our case these assets included radios, televisions, motorcycles, sewing machines, refrigerators, and a variety of other consumer goods11. The statistical technique of principal components analysis (PCA) is then used to convert each respondent’s combination of assets into a numerical index that measures relative wealth. This is a widely used approach which previous research has shown to be an accurate means of measuring living standards (see Filmer and Pritchett 1998).12 11 It is important to note that the asset index is not specifically tailored to the particular types of purchases that youth tend to make, which could have improved the accuracy of the measure 12 Filmer, Dean and Lant Pritchett (1998) “Estimating Wealth Effects Without Expenditure Data- Or Tears: With and Application to Educational Enrolments in States of India” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper #1994 excellent 20% good 36% fair poor 8% 1% very poor 35% Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 21 Impact Evaluation Findings Table 9: Economic Opportunities Variable Income, KSh/year Asset index Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Treatment group mean 58,110 73,458 -0.117 0.0395 (92,018) (109,209) (1.958) (1.925) Comparison group mean 42,337 62,261 0.189 -0.126 (77,515) (95,217) (2.071) (1.960) Treatment Effect -1,058 0.189** (3,679) (0.0774) Standard deviations/errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 Descriptive statistics and estimates of impact are presented in Table 9. Here as elsewhere in the presentation of the results, for brevity we present only the treatment effect from the regression results; coefficients for the control variables are presented in the technical appendix. The interpretation of the treatment effect is that participating in YYC caused a change in the particular outcome equal to the value of the coefficient presented. Asterisks are used to indicate statistical significance, so where asterisks do not appear the impact was not statistically different from zero13. For economic outcomes, our findings do not show an impact of the project on household incomes, but they do show a statistically significant though small impact on asset ownership, with an increase in the index of 0.189. To put this in perspective, an increase of 0.189 for the median (50th percentile) household in terms of asset ownership at baseline would correspond to moving that household into only the 53rd percentile. Thus, our findings find some evidence of a small increase in living standards as a result of the project, but do not suggest that the project had dramatic results in terms of increasing incomes and wealth14. As we discuss in greater detail in the Caveats and Limitations section, it is important to bear in mind that the lack of impact we observe on economic outcomes may reflect the short timeframe of the evaluation rather than the true impact of the program. Qualitative/Descriptive Findings As previously discussed, qualitative data from the FGDs (focus group discussions) and IDIs (In-Depth Interviews) serve to add depth to quantitative results. Similarly, descriptive statistics, which simply summarize answers to relevant survey questions, can often add context to evaluation results. In 13 In interpreting the results, it is important to bear in mind the difference between statistical significance and programmatic significance. A statistically significant treatment effect indicates strong evidence of an impact that is different from zero, but statistical significance does not imply anything about the size of the impact (i.e., programmatic significance), which depends on the value of the coefficient. 14 At the suggestion of a reviewer, we also estimated the impact on economic outcomes for only those youths who reported that they were the main income earners in their households. For this subsample, we did not find a significant impact on either incomes or the asset index. The implication is that YYC had a bigger economic impact on youths who were not the main income earners in their households. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 22 qualitative findings, youth identified a number of challenges and constraints related to income generation. Formal employment for youth was viewed by both bunge members and non-YYC youth as limited and difficult to access, particularly since jobs that are available require prior work experience. Education levels were also mentioned as a challenge to obtaining formal employment (less than 5% of the youth surveyed had a university degree or higher); some non-YYC bunge youth mentioned that those with higher degrees were often forced to take unskilled jobs bartending or hairdressing. Youth recognized that they needed to start their own small business or economic activity if they were to succeed economically, yet they experienced a lack of start-up capital and high costs of registering and setting up a business. Perceived opportunities for self-employment varied by region although activities in the agribusiness sector were mentioned across all regions. In addition to agribusiness, bunge youth in Nyanza felt there was a high potential in the arts, those in Rift Valley spoke of tourism-related activities, and in the Coast region they mentioned selling clothing and building water tanks. Youth in non-YYC communities additionally mentioned car washes, garbage collection, selling charcoal, and sports as good potential activities to make money. Most bunge members who participated in the focus groups felt that bunges provided a potentially important vehicle for improving economic opportunities for youth because an organized group provided them with a diverse pool of talents, skills, and ideas to creatively and effectively pursue income￾generating activities. Almost all the bunges they belonged to were involved in at least one income￾generating activity, largely in the agribusiness sector. “…when you are a single youth you cannot do anything but when they come together with different skills, they create a bigger block…a bigger opportunity from a small thing…I can give you an example: garbage, you know a single youth cannot clean the whole of this neighborhood but when they come together even three or five, they can clean up and end up being paid for it…” [Bunge Member, Nairobi] However, about half of the bunge members in the focus groups felt the bunge did not play a large enough role in improving members’ economic outcomes. This is also reflected in the survey data (see Figure 3, below). In terms of economic activities bunge members did independent of the bunge (employment, growing crops, and running small businesses), about half rated the bunge as helpful in terms of teaching skills; however, in all other ways, such as in providing credits and inputs, few rated the bunge as helpful. For example, among those who said they were employed for pay at endline, less than 35% thought the bunge had helped them with their job in generating employment, teaching them skills for their job, or finding a job or information through another bunge member (see Figure 3, below). Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 23 Figure 3: Percentage who said bunge was helpful in their employment in the following ways: Opinions on the helpfulness of the bunge were similar for economic activities other than employment; members felt skills training was the most helpful aspect. In terms of members who ran their own businesses, 40% said the bunge was helpful with teaching them skills, while few (17%) said it was helpful with providing credits and less than 4% said it helped in some other way (figures not shown). In terms of bunge members who grew crops on their own, few rated the bunge as helpful in providing inputs, credit or labor, but again, nearly 50% said the bunge was helpful in teaching them skills (See Figure 4, below). In terms of bunge members who raised livestock on their own, again, nearly half felt the bunge was helpful in terms of training, but respondents did not rate the bunge as very helpful in providing credit or any other way. Figure 4: Percentage who said bunge was helpful with growing crops in the following ways: 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Generating employment (n=1562) Teaching you skills that were helpful (n=1563) Finding job or info through another member (n=1562) Some other way (n=1557) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Teaching skills (n=2511) Giving credit for inputs (n=2513) Giving inputs (n=2513) Providing labor (n=2514) Some other way (n=2507) Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 24 The comparatively higher perceived benefits of bunges teaching skills in comparison to other benefits are reflected in the focus groups with bunge youth as well. A few spoke positively about receiving business start-up training, which they found valuable as they ventured into small businesses on an individual and group level. Bunge youth in the Coast and Western regions also reported having received specific training focused on poultry farming and bee-keeping from partner organizations. “We also did what we called “do it yourself business start-up training.” This was helpful because it is used to help the youth explore new business ideas, how to start a business, how to market themselves, and things like that.” [Male Mobilizer, Coast Region] The lack of perceived impact in acquiring credit or creating jobs can be explained by the fact that youth expressed difficulties in realizing the potential of creating their own businesses; they frequently mentioned the barriers and hurdles they faced – mainly the high costs of establishing businesses (capital costs in addition to registration, licensing, permitting, and tax fees), the lack of funding and access to finance for the sums required, and their lack of the required managerial or technical skills. In particular, a consistent theme that emerged was the difficulty, as a young person without credit history or collateral, of securing a bank loan for business start-up costs. “Some of the challenges which I have seen mostly are in acquiring loans, or high incentives from the government, the bank, it’s not easy for the youth because they don’t have title deeds, they don’t own land, they don’t own vehicles, which you can stand as compensation for those loans, that is one challenge…” [Bunge Member, Nairobi] Even though Youth Funds, bunge SACCOs, and table banking bunges have been established, it seems that the Youth Funds are difficult to access due to lack of information and experience in filing paperwork (there was also mention of nepotism); and the bunge SACCOs and table banking bunges, while they were viewed positively by bunge youth, are not able to provide loans large enough for significant capital investments. However, given the program shift from the national grant fund to the county SACCO model, again, opinions on funding may reflect the frustration with the original YYC National program, or delays in funding that occurred from the shift. As of the endline, 16.6% of the bunge members said they were part of a bunge SACCO, and of those who weren’t a further 24.5% said there was a bunge SACCO they could join if they wanted to. “We also have what we call savings, we just take it to the bank, we borrow a small loan, and then carry on…we buy one of the members a motorcycle, if they are a farmer and would like to boost their business.” [Table Banking Bunge Member, Central Region] Difficulty with acquiring large loans was coupled with the fact that the grants were not awarded to all bunges as members had expected. “I will also say no [YYC did not positively impact economic outcomes] because if you look at the number of youth that have actually benefited from the economic part of it, they are 5%, because the grant didn’t actually get to everyone.” [County Bunge Member, Rift Valley] For example, one dissolved bunge in the Western region received training on greenhouse farming and poultry keeping. While this was beneficial, bunge members struggled with lack of capital to fully launch their activities, as well as the lack of materials to manage their poultry and greenhouses: “…we lacked some of the materials…like for poultry, we didn’t have the places where we could keep these chicken, also for tomatoes we didn’t have the equipment to use.” [Dissolved Bunge Member, Western Region] Overall, a theme of the qualitative data is that youths tended to be disappointed with the economic outcomes related to the project. In response to a question about whether YYC had contributed to the Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 25 belief that youths can overcome challenges and accomplish their goals, one respondent cited economic concerns as an obstacle: “I would say no because, if you have not empowered these people economically… self-reliance is about being economically stable. Without you being economically stable you can’t say you’re self-reliant because you have to rely on someone else to feed you so that one I can say no.”[County Bunge Member, Rift Valley Region] III. POLITICAL EMPOWERMENT AND INCLUSION Research question: 2) Does participating in YYC lead to closer engagement with government and political leaders? Do YYC youths experience a greater sense of political empowerment in terms of their beliefs about their own capacity to effect meaningful and peaceful change through the political system? The survey includes a range of questions designed to measure the extent to which respondents feel and act politically engaged and empowered, and how they perceive government officials and politicians. These include whether or not the respondent discussed politics often over the past year, as well as whether they agree with a series of statements such as “politics is too complicated for an ordinary person to understand” and “as far as politics is concerned, friends and neighbors don’t take my opinions seriously.” In addition, youths were asked whether they agree with a series of statements about political leaders such as “if there are problems with the local government, nothing can be done,” “it is very difficult for an ordinary person to be heard outside of election time,” and the extent to which political parties, parliament, and local councilors take youth interests into account. Impact Evaluation Findings Table 10a: Political Empowerment and Inclusion Variable Discussed politics often in past year “Politics too complicated to understand” “Others don't take my opinion seriously” “If problems with local gov’t, nothing can be done” Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Treatment group mean 12.5% 11.6% 87.2% 82.1% 59.8% 58.4% 30.0% 21.6% Comparison group mean 11.5% 11.5% 86.5% 82.4% 56.7% 59.8% 37.8% 35.7% Treatment Effect -0.0147 -0.0440 -0.115** -0.0323 (0.0633) (0.0597) (0.0501) (0.0522) Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 26 Table 10b: Political Empowerment and Inclusion, cont’d Variable “It is very difficult for ordinary person to be heard outside election time” “Political parties take into account youth interests a lot” “Parliament takes into account youth interests a lot” “Local councilors take into account youth interests a lot” Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Treatment group mean 53.1% 40.7% 7.2% 6.2% 9.4% 6.6% 7.5% 6.1% Comparison group mean 55.2% 36.0% 5.3% 6.2% 6.0% 6.5% 4.7% 5.3% Treatment Effect 0.124** -0.135* -0.204*** -0.118 (0.0503) (0.0807) (0.0781) (0.0807) Standard deviations/errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 Means and estimates of impact are shown in tables 10a and 10b. Our impact evaluation results show that the program caused youths to believe their political views were taken more seriously by those around them. We do not detect positive impacts on our other measures of political empowerment. In fact, for several variables YYC participation appears to have led to more pessimistic views about politics. YYC participants were more likely than the comparison group to have changed their views - in a negative way - about whether ordinary people cannot be heard outside of election time, and whether political parties or parliament take youth interests into account. One possible explanation is that participating in YYC gave youths the confidence to express stronger (negative) views about these issues than they would have otherwise, or that learning about these issues and discussing them with other youths in the context of YYC led to these more negative perceptions. The explanation that making increased demands as an important first step to empowerment is consistent with the design and the early stage of development of YYC. The change theory YYC used to formulate programs to address the marginalization and lack of voice of youth was “youth empowerment,” whereby moving beneficiaries from non-participation to tokenism to full empowerment has many intermediate steps. During the first year the focus of YYC was to begin the empowerment process by mobilizing youth to form village bunges that could act in their own interests. Although youth may not indicate they are empowered yet, according to the theory their increased negative views on politics could represent the step whereby they have moved from being passive recipients of assistance to demanding a say in their future. Finally, it is important to note that as changes in political empowerment cannot be directly observed, our survey questions are by nature imperfect measures. We thus caution against drawing strong conclusions from these findings15 . 15 We also note that the survey covered several other dimensions of political empowerment and inclusion that we analyzed but for which we did not find an impact. For brevity, we omit those results here, but they include whether the respondent had contacted various types of government officials or political party representative in the past year, as well as agreement with some additional statements related to political empowerment. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 27 Qualitative/Descriptive Findings Our qualitative findings illustrate that youths tend to feel alienated from the political leaders and the political process. Nonetheless, both youths and other stakeholders consistently expressed the view that YYC has made an important contribution in terms of increasing youth political involvement, which also supports the theory that YYC is in the early stages of youth empowerment. In terms of overall alienation from politics, the general feeling among bunge youth from the focus groups was that political leaders only engaged with youth and youth issues during election times and otherwise did not provide any forums for their views or needs to be heard. Locally elected leaders were felt to be largely inaccessible and unconcerned with youth issues. Only a few youth felt the current president-elect and the central government had made an effort to engage youth politically. “I think our leaders misuse us because they only come to us when they need our votes. We give them our views, they say when they are elected that’s the first thing they’ll do. When they are elected, they disappear, there’s nothing they do.” [Bunge Member, Coast Region] While both bunge youth and non-YYC youth expressed interest in participating in politics, they felt that youths were limited in their ability to seek office both because of lack of funds and negative perceptions of youths. “I think also our societies tend to influence our youth, in terms of politics, in that there’re some societies and some communities where they believe a youthful person cannot be a very good leader and so they tend to discourage them that ‘you cannot lead us, you cannot … how can you reach the old people?’…80% of youth know about politics, but they lack that courage of taking a risk. Taking a risk whereby to go for a post because most of our youth are just there to be used. They are just there to go for campaign rallies.” [Non-YYC Community Member, Rift Valley Region] Despite the overall negative view of political inclusion of youth, some bunge and YYC community members felt that the situation had improved. A few members felt their association with the bunge had provided them with increased access to leaders such as Members of Parliament (MPs), governors, and members of county assemblies. “Another thing is that right now, it is possible to meet and talk with your MP or your Councilor. But before then, one always wondered on where to start if you wanted to meet with them.” [Female Bunge Leader, Western Region] One area where most bunge youth and YYC community members felt the YYC program had played an important role was in greater political involvement of youth. The large shift that occurred was talked about as moving from a largely idle and passive youth to youth that are actively involved in their communities and even participating in the political and therefore decision making process. Youth are acting in their own interests through political participation (some youth even ran and were elected); through taking an active role in civic education of other youth and getting them to vote and be more politically active ( members of the YYC communities mentioned the benefits of belonging to a youth group included becoming more engaged with the political leadership in their communities and even identifying ways of seeking support from their political leaders); they are interacting positively with community elders and leaders, changing their negative perceptions of youth, through organizing youth and community events; and they are taking the initiative to lead advocacy activities with youth on drugs and substance abuse and other issues affecting youth such as Female Genital Mutilation. “We are very pleased with the [YYC bunge] platform. We can now go anywhere, we can lobby for funds, we can look for other stakeholders, we can crisscross here and there and seek for some funds, we can also network,” [Male National Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] “…yes, they (youth) are involved more in leadership due to the fact that they can elect their leaders from the village level, county level…they are more involved in knowing the best leaders. During the Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 28 elections we had debates in the villages, the county with people asking for positions. They would then determine who is best suited and then they just discuss the issue… so they have been more involved in politics.” [Implementing Partner, Coast Region] In particular, youth mentioned mobilizing voters, encouraging youth to get registered prior to the 2013 election, and promoting peaceful elections, with the “My ID, My Life” campaign highlighted by many respondents. Bunge members provided voter and civic education to fellow youth and raised awareness in their communities around political issues, enabling more informed voting decisions. “In our area for sure [the bunge] has helped many youth because in this Bungoma County, for most of the youth getting an ID [card] was a problem but through our leaders and the members most of youth now have IDs and most of them voted. So I’m very grateful for this group of ours through our leaders and members, they have done a great job.” [Bunge Member, Western Region] Most bunge youth who participated in the focus groups felt they benefitted from the civic education training provided by the program. In a few cases, even non-youth community members mentioned the positive effect of creating leadership opportunities for youth and practicing democracy through bunge group elections, but most were not aware of the impact of the program in this respect. In addition, bunge members, implementing partners, and USAID staff talked about how the bunges identified youth leaders and gave them the leadership experience that encouraged a number of them to successfully compete for elective positions in the last election, acquiring positions in county assemblies and parliament. The fact that youth are taking on these leadership roles is evidence of their empowerment. “Due to the fact that the youth have now taken leadership role, the fact that youth are now engaging the administration, the fact that the youth now can be included in committees at the village level…they are now recognized and their participation is really important and they were not there, they were not included in those committees originally and now they can sit there and engage…” [Implementing Partner. Coast Region] IV. TRUST AND SOCIAL CAPITAL Research question: 3) Does YYC lead to greater social inclusion for youths in the broader community, particularly across ethnic lines? Does YYC foster leadership qualities that are reflected in behavior extending beyond the project itself? Our quantitative analysis includes several outcome variables that are designed to measure the impact of the program on trust and social connectedness within the community. The first of these is the number of organizations that the youth belongs to, including those related to civic, social, or economic activities, arts, sports, etc. This variable has been used as a measure of social capital in previous studies (e.g. Narayan and Pritchett 199916), and the hypothesis is that participating in YYC could lead to further participation in other kinds of organizations as well. We also consider whether the youth holds a leadership position in any of these other organizations. Two additional questions measure trust and connectedness to the community. Respondents are asked how likely it is that their village would come together to help someone who had suffered an unfortunate circumstance, such as a serious illness. We also ask respondents to imagine themselves in a situation where they needed to borrow money for a week’s worth of expenses, and ask whether there would be anyone outside of their family in the village who would help. 16 Narayan, Deepak and Lant Pritchett (1999) “Cents and Sociability: Household Income and Social Capital in Rural Tanzania” Economic Development and Cultural Change 47 (4) pp. 871-897 Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 29 Impact Evaluation Findings Table 11: Trust and Social Capital Variable Number of other orgs joined Held leadership role in other organizations Village very likely to help someone in trouble Could get financial help from community Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Treatment group mean 2.25 1.90 44.2% 37.5% 60.8% 49.5% 71.3% 75.7% (1.80) (1.60) Comparison group mean 1.58 1.39 29.6% 28.1% 56.3% 40.0% 64.7% 70.2% (1.39) (1.30) Treatment Effect -0.0972* -0.0860 0.167*** 0.0453 (0.0570) (0.0548) (0.0500) (0.0534) Standard deviations/errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 The results in Table 11 show mixed impacts on these outcomes. We observe a strong and significant impact on views about whether the village would come together to help someone in an unfortunate circumstance. We find that YYC leads to a 16.7% higher likelihood that a participant believes the village is “very likely” to help, indicating the YYC has led to greater sense of trust in the community on the part of youths in this respect. Conversely, contrary to our expectations YYC caused participants to join slightly fewer additional groups than non-participants. A possible explanation is that the time and attention that YYC participants devoted to the bunge reduced their availability to join other groups. We do not find a significant impact on whether or not participants assumed leadership roles in other organizations, nor do we find any impact on whether the youth believe that they could borrow money from someone in the community or outside their ethnic group17. Qualitative/Descriptive Findings Youths felt that negative perceptions of young people by others in the community are a serious concern. Youths felt they tended to be thought of as irresponsible, untrustworthy, inexperienced and unruly by adults. Due to their age, they felt their opinions are marginalized in community dialogues, leading to the non-participation of youth in decision-making and community building. “The youth are being seen as the bad omen in the community, whenever a chicken is stolen somewhere they say it is the youth, cows get lost, charcoal they say it is the youth.” [County Bunge Member, Rift Valley Region] Despite this continued negative perception, both bunge members and other stakeholders consistently expressed the view that YYC is contributing to an increase in trust and respect for youth. Respondents felt that the program had provided youth with an opportunity to discover themselves, make positive contributions to their communities, and develop their skills and use them for their own benefit. Parents 17 One possible explanation for the lack of a significant finding here is that youth would be more prone to receive gifts or transfers in difficult circumstances as opposed to loans Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 30 of bunge members across the regions spoke of how their views and attitudes towards youth had changed, sensing an increase in leadership and responsibility that increased their trust of youth. “[I see] a very big difference because now as of this time, this moment, you cannot just go there and find them seating there idle, yes at least you find them preoccupied with either farming or some other kind of job related duties…you can see youth coming up now and [addressing] various issues at the society level, you can see youth coming now and they impact positively on the way things are being done maybe by the provincial administration, maybe the political ministry at the community level…maybe you can see them now going to chiefs’ barazas which they never used to do and in fact contributing positively [now]...” [Male parent, Nyanza Region] “So I think apart from the financial benefits [the bunge] brings about [other] dimensions, political dimension, administrative dimension and the values that are imparted when they meet and talk give them an inch above the rest, and also at the same time they are used as ambassadors to inculcate needed values in others and I believe this is a way of empowering society. I also believe that nowadays there is a slight change as I remember in the past there used to be shouting and hooliganism everywhere from the youth but nowadays the youth pattern is changing in a different way. Also the youth nowadays see themselves as the leaders of tomorrow and they are challenged to take up the mantle in a positive way.” [Male Parent, Coastal Region] A common theme among the bunge members who participated in focus groups was increased youth involvement in community-level activities, often organized through their respective bunge groups. This mainly took the form of community policing; patrolling neighborhoods and alerting authorities of potential risks; or community clean-up activities organized in partnership with local leaders and churches. The YYC program was perceived positively by community members, and several bunge members said they received support from elders, chiefs, and religious leaders in organizing youth and community events such as football games and fundraisers. “In the beginning, it was tough but now they have come to realize that it’s important to them to accept us because there are some things they can’t do well and we can, so we help each other in the community.” [Bunge Member, Western Region] “We had an environment activity, we cleared the nursery, we planted trees. Currently there are big trees. So the community saw that the youth are doing a good job so they are willing to participate in the community and they are willing to engage the youth more because they can see the youth are doing positive things.” [Male County Bunge Member, Central Region] V. ATTITUDES/BEHAVIORS TOWARDS ETHNICITY AND VIOLENCE Research question: 4) Have attitudes towards violence and ethnicity changed on the part of youths who participate in YYC? What are the characteristics of bunges that are more or less effective in terms of influencing this outcome? In practice, has YYC! reduced the incidence of post-election violence following the 2012-3 presidential election? The impact of YYC on political violence is difficult to assess quantitatively. Following the 2013 presidential elections, there was little political violence. While YYC may have contributed to this peaceful outcome, we are not able to assess the extent of this impact quantitatively as we cannot use a counterfactual to assess what would have happened in the absence of YYC. addition, although our original questionnaire included a number of questions intended to measure attitudes related to violence, respondents overwhelmingly indicated disapproval of violence at baseline and thus these questions could not be used to assess the impact of the program because respondents already disapproved of violence at baseline. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 31 Our survey includes two outcomes related to ethnicity. First, we ask respondents the extent to which they identify themselves as Kenyans as opposed to members of their ethnic group. We thus consider the impact of the program on the likelihood that an individual feels “only Kenyan.” Secondly, similar to the question in the social capital section, we ask if respondents were to find themselves in an emergency where they needed to borrow a small amount of money, would they be able to do so from someone outside of their own ethnic group. Impact Evaluation Findings Table 12: Attitudes/Behaviors towards ethnicity and violence Variable Could get help outside own ethnic group Likelihood that the respondent feels “only Kenyan” Baseline Endline Baseline Endline Treatment group mean 54.3% 59.9% 42.1% 38.3% Comparison group mean 44.2% 53.9% 40.0% 39.5% Treatment Effect 0.00529 (0.0511) Standard deviations/errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 As Table 12 shows, we do not find statistically significant impacts on either of these outcomes. The likelihood of being able to find help outside of one’s ethnic group rose over time for both groups, but the comparison group showed a greater rate of increase18. The likelihood of feeling “only Kenyan” fell slightly for both groups, with only a small difference between the treatment and comparison groups. The regression results show no significant impact in either case. As in the case of the political empowerment variables, it is important to bear in mind that these measures are imperfect and should not be taken as strong evidence that the program did not impact attitudes towards violence or ethnicity. Qualitative/Descriptive Findings Bunge youth who participated in the focus groups are highly aware of ethnic differences in their communities and stated that tensions and antagonism along ethnic lines are still a reality that they regularly face. Yet, they spoke of increased tolerance and peacefulness in the electoral process and that they do not believe there will be a return to the level of violence seen in 2007, as evidenced by the stable elections held in 2013. “[During] the post-election violence, we are the ones who played a major role in uprooting railways, other property but this one which past, youth thought [to themselves] ‘why should I leave my chicken and go shouting on the roads, that I stop watering the vegetables and I attend the campaign rallies and it won’t benefit me in any way…” [Bunge Member, Western Region] 18 As noted in section 4.4, one possible explanation for the lack of a significant finding here is that youth would be more prone to receive gifts or transfers in difficult circumstances as opposed to loans Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 32 The bunge youth felt that a major contribution of the YYC program was in the creation of bunges that crossed tribal lines and were vehicles for the promotion of peace within their communities. Often, bunges were actively involved in different peace promoting activities leading up to the general elections and YYC stakeholders spoke of the positive role that YYC played in mobilizing peace initiatives for youth and their communities more broadly. The Tuko Rada peace campaign was mentioned in particular. “We did a peace campaign also, so the youth demonstrated that they want peace during the elections. That is they want peace before elections, during, and after elections. So, I believe that’s why there was no violence reported during the elections. So, I can say the YYC did a good job.” [Male County Bunge Member, Central Region] In some cases bunges provided ethnic minorities the opportunity to take on leadership positions. The idea of accepting and incorporating members of different ethnic backgrounds was viewed as important in avoiding the creation of polarized groups based on tribe. “… like in our group we are people of different tribes, so now that we are joined we can’t allow another tribe to be hurt in our group. For me it’s like my sister or my brother. So we sat and taught ourselves even the issue of youths being used by politicians when we are together like now we don’t want. Even if we are called somewhere in a meeting with a politician, if he calls me as a leader, if he speaks we come and talk to the youth when we are all together, we cannot be separated either by tribe or color, we are all the same.” [Female Bunge Leader, Coast Region] On the other hand, it is important to note that there were some mixed views among bunge members regarding the success of the program in reducing ethnic divides. Some believed that the success of reducing ethnic divides was much more pronounced in areas of mixed ethnicity, while others did not believe the bunge played any role in the reduction of ethnic conflict. These views may be explained in part by the fact that some implementation areas exhibit low levels of ethnic diversity, and thus there was little scope for YYC to effect change in this regard in some cases. There was general agreement among YYC stakeholders and implementers in all regions that the YYC program played a role in preaching peace and tolerance, most notably during the March 2013 election period, although notably the policemen and women interviewed were not aware of any role played by YYC in changing youth’s views of violence and ethnicity. “They [bunge youth] also maintain peace and order, like there is this issue where we had a problem with the security and the groups became like vigilantes. We talked to [bunge youth] in the presence of the OCPD [Officer Commanding Police Division] and they were given that mandate in liaison with the police. This has made security tighter at our place and this is something we are thankful of as people were being mugged frequently. They [bunge youth] are doing this service for free.” [Council Member, Rift Valley Region] VI. SELF-EFFICACY Research question: 5) Does YYC have a positive impact on psychological outcomes such as self-efficacy and relatedness to others for participants? What are the characteristics of bunges that are particularly successful or unsuccessful in this regard? A final type of outcome relates to the psychological dimensions of program participation. In addition to economic and social impacts, we would expect program participants to experience a greater sense of personal empowerment and higher levels of self-esteem. To measure these types of outcomes quantitatively, our questionnaire includes the Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES). Scholz et. al. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 33 (2002)19 describes the concept of self-efficacy as “personal action control or agency. A person who believes in being able to produce a desired effect can lead a more active and self-determined life. This ‘can-do’ cognition mirrors a sense of control over one’s environment. It reflects the belief of being able to control challenging environmental demands by taking adaptive action. It can be regarded as an optimistic and self-confident view of one’s capability to deal with certain life stressors.” (p. 242). The GSES is specifically designed as a cross-cultural tool, and in a study of the results of the GSES in 25 countries, Scholz et. al. (2002) provides evidence that the underlying construct is valid across cultural contexts. The GSES consists of the ten questions listed in Table 13 below. The numerical responses to each of the ten questions are averaged to generate a score for each respondent between 1 and 4. Table 13: The Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale 1. I can always manage to solve my problems if I try hard enough 2. If someone opposes me, I can find the means and ways to get what I want 3. I am certain I can accomplish my goals 4. I am confident that I could deal effectively with unexpected events 5. Thanks to my resourcefulness, I can handle unforeseen situations 6. I can solve most problems if I invest the necessary effort 7. I can remain calm when facing difficulties because I can rely on my coping abilities 8. When I am confronted with a problem, I can find several solutions 9. If I am in trouble, I can think of a good solution 10. I can handle whatever comes my way Responses: 1- Not At All true, 2- Hardly True, 3- Moderately True, 4- Exactly True Impact Evaluation Findings Table 14: Self Efficacy Variable Self-efficacy rating Baseline Endline Treatment group mean 3.207 3.145 (0.449) (0.453) Comparison group mean 3.176 3.042 (0.475) (0.504) Treatment Effect 0.0644*** (0.0163) Standard deviations/errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 The means and estimate of impact on the GSES are shown above. We find a statistically significant impact of YYC on the GSES of 0.0644 points. The interpretation of the size of the coefficient is somewhat difficult given the nature of the GSES scale. The GSES is a valid and reliable tool, but it is 19 Scholz, Urte, Benicio Gutierrez Dona, Shonali Sud, and Ralf Schwarzer (2002) “Is General Self-Efficacy a Universal Construct?” European Journal of Psychological Assessment 18 (2) pp. 242-251 Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 34 difficult to characterize a particular change as “large” or “small.” As the table illustrates, there was a drop in self-efficacy over time for both the treatment and comparison group, but this drop was smaller for the treatment group. Given the average drop in the comparison group of 0.129 points, our estimate of impact indicates that the average drop in the GSES was 50.4% lower in the treatment group. Qualitative/Descriptive Findings The positive impact of YYC on self-efficacy is confirmed by both descriptive survey and qualitative findings. The main problem affecting youth’s self-efficacy and self-confidence was perceived by focus group and KII respondents to be unemployment that led to youth being idle and therefore involved in crime, violence, and substance abuse. The YYC program was valued, among youth and stakeholders alike, for providing youth with an opportunity to not only become involved in positive activities within their communities but also with opportunities to generate income, which as a result, discouraged them from engaging in substance abuse and crime. In addition, bunge youth across the different regions were particularly active in speaking to their communities and fellow youth about substance abuse. “I remember like I ever walked around…Makadara, you find that many young people who’d think of maybe going to do drugs, or maybe smoke stuff, [now] you find maybe they’ll get that particular few coins from the car wash, and you find them that they are responsible, they can buy food, they can go eat good food that is going to make them be good people in the society. So you find from the way they reason, their life style has dramatically changed.” [Male Religious Leader, Nairobi Region] “Yes they are doing entrepreneurship, talent nurturing, youth empowerment into leadership which has really brought a change into their lives. In talent nurturing they are doing behavioral change where they are trying to rehabilitate youths who had become drug addicts.” [Female National CSO Member, Coast Region] In addition, 84.1% of our bunge member survey respondents agreed with the statement that the bunge “is a safe place where I can discuss issues that I wouldn’t be able to discuss anywhere else.” Of those, the majority (54.1%) felt that the bunge had made a big difference to them in this regard, highlighting the importance of bunges to the psychological well-being of participants. A theme that emerges strongly from the qualitative data is that YYC stakeholders and bunge youth both felt that the YYC program improved self-efficacy and made an important contribution to an overall improvement of youth’s outlook on life. The program gave youths the opportunity to assume leadership positions and practice public speaking and engagement skills, gaining personal confidence. They felt their self-image was improved, which translated into improved interactions with others, particularly those holding positions of leadership within the community. “The first thing is that we appreciate ourselves, you see, and maybe now participate actively; you know you encourage other youths actually to take part in the barazas or anything else…the campaign added an ingredient: that is confidence amongst ourselves and [positive] attitude towards each other, so the campaign helped us so much.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Rift Valley Region] “…it really helped me to really talk to people and to believe…to see something in myself that I really did not because this people, for them to elect me, they saw something, so it really helped me to know like I can do, I can do something. I can do anything if I put my mind to it” [Female National Bunge Member, Central Region] Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 35 VII. DIFFERENTIATED IMPACTS BY GENDER AND POVERTY STATUS20 While the findings above show the average impacts for YYC participants, it is important to also consider the possibility that the program may have impacted different sub-populations in different ways. For each of the outcomes included in the previous section, we estimate the impact of YYC on female bunge members as distinct from male bunge members, as well as on poor bunge members relative to non￾poor.21 Table 15 shows how the impacts on women and the poor compared to the averages, illustrating where the impact was stronger, weaker, or the same. In terms of gender, overall impacts were broadly similar for women and men, but with some notable differences. Both economic outcomes were weaker for women, suggesting that the limited economic impacts of YYC tended to reach male participants to a greater extent than female participants. Impacts on all of our political empowerment and inclusion variables were not significantly different between women and men. Women did have a greater tendency to join other groups as a result of YYC, suggesting that YYC was more effective at opening the door for broader social involvement for women. However, women also experienced weaker impacts in terms of perceiving that they could get help from someone in the community, as well as self-efficacy. The findings for poverty status illustrate several outcomes where impacts were weaker for the poorest 15% of our sample, including both of the economic outcomes as was the case for women. YYC was also less likely to cause the poorest respondents to discuss politics more often, or improve the perceived availability of help within the community and outside of one’s own ethnic group. The impact on self￾efficacy was also smaller for these respondents. It is important to note that though we have focused on the poorest respondents in the survey here, incomes tended to be low across the entire sample and many YYC youths could be classified as poor depending on the criteria used. Thus, these results should not be interpreted as evidence that YYC failed to reach the poor, only that it was less successful in affecting certain outcomes for the very poorest respondents in the sample. A possible explanation is that the poorest often face numerous additional constraints that must be addressed in addition to those that YYC focuses on. 20 In addition to differentiating by gender and poverty status, we also estimated separate impact models for each of the six regions in which YYC was implemented, with special attention to Nairobi as reflecting an urban setting. There are no clear findings that emerge from the results, as most of the coefficients are statistically insignificant, possibly due to smaller sample sizes. We thus omit presentation of these results for space reasons. 21 Methodologically, we do this by estimating equation (i) described in section 3, but including an additional interaction term in the model that interacts a either gender dummy variable or poverty status dummy with our (δendline x δtreat) term that we use to measure the treatment effect. Poverty is defined as being in the bottom 15% of our asset index. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 36 Table 15: Differential Impacts for Women and the Poor Outcomes WOMEN THE POOR Stronger Impact Weaker Impact Same Impact Stronger Impact Weaker Impact Same Impact Economic Opportunities Household income   Asset index   Political Empowerment and Inclusion Discussed politics often in past year   “Politics too complicated to understand”   “Others don't take my opinion seriously”   “If problems with local gov’t, nothing can be done”   “It is very difficult for ordinary person to be heard outside election time”   “Political parties take into account youth interests a lot”   “Parliament takes into account youth interests a lot”   “Local councilors take into account youth interests a lot”   Trust and Social Capital Number of other orgs joined   Held leadership role in other organizations   Village very likely to help someone in trouble  Could get financial help from community   Attitudes/Behaviors Towards Ethnicity and Violence Could get help outside own ethnic group   Likelihood that the respondent feels “only Kenyan”   Self-Efficacy Self-efficacy rating   Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 37 VIII. FINDINGS FROM ANALYSIS OF IMPACT OF BUNGE CHARACTERISTICS Our analysis of how various bunge characteristic and different experiences under YYC lead to different outcomes resulted in a number of additional interesting results. Due to space limitations we defer presentation of the regression coefficients to the appendix and instead summarize the key trends and findings here. However, as described in Section 6, it is important to bear in mind that our ability to infer causality from this portion of the analysis is limited, and thus conclusions should be viewed as suggestive only. A consistent finding is that the main activity of the bunge was not strongly associated with differences in outcomes. We find no evidence that bunges organized around income-generating activities led to better economic outcomes compared to bunges organized around other activities. In fact, members of bunges organized around community service had statistically significantly larger improvements in income and asset ownership as compared to members of bunges organized around agricultural activities or livestock. Bunges organized around community service tended to have better outcomes related to political empowerment, but by and large these were not statistically significant. Greater engagement with various aspects of the program was associated with improved outcomes across a range of dimensions. Electing a member to the county bunge, participating in a SACCO that was formed for bunge members, and participating in “Early Warning, Early Response” were all strongly associated with greater improvements in outcomes for individual members as compared to bunges that did not participate in these activities. Interestingly, participation in each of these aspects of the program was associated with greater improvements in all five categories of outcomes. In addition, other measures of engagement such as frequency of meetings, percentage of members who attend regularly, and positive views of bunge leaders were associated with improved outcomes as well. The relationship between youths prior to the program appears to have had impact on social capital outcomes. Where bunges had been formed from pre-existing groups, there were smaller benefits in terms of a number of variables related to social capital. Members of these bunges were less likely to go on to join additional groups, assume leadership positions within those groups, or to identify as “only Kenyan” rather than also as a member of their ethnic group. Pre-existing groups did show larger increases in wealth as measured by asset accumulation, but the effect is small and only weakly significant. Several other variables that the analysis considered were not associated with meaningful differences in outcomes. These included whether the bunge had received trainings of various types, as well as approaches to generating revenue, size of the bunge, and the percentage of youths in the community who are part of the bunge, and the percentage of original members who dropped out of the bunge. IX. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS We summarize the main conclusions and recommendations that emerge from the findings in terms of conclusions related to the impact of YYC, as well as implications for future programming as follows: BUNGES TENDED TO REMAIN ACTIVE AND ENGAGED THROUGHOUT THE EVALUATION PERIOD. Over the year-and-a-half period between our surveys, over 80% of the bunges interviewed at baseline were still active. The majority of these were continuing to meet bi￾weekly or more often, and on average bunges did not experience significant reductions in the number of members or the percentage of these who attended meetings regularly. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 38 YYC IMPROVED RELATIONS BETWEEN YOUTH AND THEIR COMMUNITIES. Although negative perceptions of youths by other segments of the community remain a concern, our results indicate that YYC was effective in improving the situation. Both YYC participants and other members of the community tended to see YYC as a means for youths to effectively demonstrate their willingness and ability to engage in constructive activities, which countered views that youths are lazy, untrustworthy, or have little to offer. The program also led to a statistically significant increase in the tendency of participants to express trust in their communities. YYC WAS SUCCESSFUL IN TERMS OF INCREASING PARTICIPANTS’ SELF CONFIDENCE AND SELF-ESTEEM. We find a statistically significant impact of the program on participants’ scores on the Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES), a psychometric tool used to measure self-efficacy in a variety of cultural contexts. Focus group discussions with participants echoed this finding, as youth indicated that YYC improved their confidence, attitudes towards one another, and belief in their ability to accomplish their goals. YYC LED TO SOME IMPROVEMENTS IN POLITICAL ENGAGEMENT, BUT YOUTHS CONTINUE TO FEEL ALIENATED BY POLITICAL ELITES AND THE POLITICAL SYSTEM. As a result of YYC, participants were 11.5% more likely to report that friends and neighbors take their views about politics seriously. Qualitative findings suggest that YYC was important in fostering civic engagement, promoting more informed political views, and facilitating engagement with political leaders in some cases. However, youths continue to view politicians as generally unresponsive to the needs of youth; and our quantitative measures of engagement with political actors and the political process did not show a significant impact from the program. THE IMPACT OF YYC ON ECONOMIC OUTCOMES WAS LIMITED. Our empirical analysis finds no impact of the program on household incomes, and only a trivial increase in wealth as measured by asset ownership. Program participants recognized the potential of bunges to increase incomes by enabling members to organize and coordinate their activities. However, in practice most participants did not view the bunge as having been helpful in generating incomes and many were disappointed in this respect. Ultimately, economic activities related to the bunges do not appear to have been sufficient to overcome key constraints that youths identified such as lack of formal employment activities, inability to access credit and high costs of starting a business, as well as lack of required technical and managerial expertise. It is important to note that our findings do not conclusively rule out economic impacts of YYC. Some participants may have experienced economic benefits, and in addition economic benefits may be realized over a longer period of time. However, we can conclude that over the evaluation period, on average YYC did not have a substantial impact on economic outcomes for our sample of participants. IMPORTANT SOURCES OF BENEFITS FROM YYC WERE THE SKILLS AND LESSONS DERIVED FROM THE PROCESS OF PARTICIPATING IN THE BUNGE. While bunges formed for a variety of purposes, differences in outcomes were driven considerably more by the level of engagement of the bunge, rather than its specific purpose or activities. The implication is that as the YYC program design anticipated, the experience of participating in the process of coming together and working towards a common goal led to important benefits for the youth who participated. Thus, future programming related to youth groups like bunges might prioritize facilitating higher levels of engagement within the group. YOUTH GROUPS SUCH AS BUNGES COULD BENEFIT FROM “MENTORING” RELATIONSHIPS WITH RESPECTED MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY. Youth expressed a desire for a higher level of guidance, engagement, and advice concerning bunge activities. Youth appreciated the role that mobilizers played, particularly when they stayed involved with the bunge, and expressed the view that their continued engagement would have been helpful. A need was also Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 39 expressed for mentors to help youth interact with implementing partners and others in the community. An implication for further youth-related programming is that engaging with respected community members such as the YYC mobilizers can be an effective means of both conducting outreach about the program, and facilitating communication between youths and other stakeholders. YOUTHS PERCEIVED THE TRAININGS THEY RECEIVED AS PART OF YYC TO BE A PARTICULARLY VALUABLE ASPECT OF THE PROGRAM. In terms of their views about the program, participants appreciated the trainings they received. Youths overwhelmingly indicated that they would have liked to receive more trainings related to income-generating activities (89%) and leadership and organization (90%). Thus, an implication for future programming is to include trainings similar to those provided by YYC. It is worth noting, however, that our empirical analysis did not find a link between the trainings and improved outcomes. POST-ELECTION VIOLENCE WAS MINIMAL THROUGHOUT KENYA FOLLOWING THE 2013 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS. Finally, it is important to note the absence of post￾election violence in light of the fact that this was an important goal of the program. Because of the fact that violence after the 2013 presidential elections was minimal in both treatment and comparison areas, our evaluation is not able to rigorously determine the role that YYC played in preventing violence or the extent to which YYC can be credited with achieving this outcome. However, our qualitative data shows that program participants and other stakeholders viewed YYC as making an important contribution. The evaluation should not be interpreted as discounting the possibility that YYC played an instrumental role in preventing post-election violence in 2013, which is seen as a major accomplishment of the program by the YYC Technical Team. Because we cannot evaluate this hypothesis rigorously, however, we do not emphasize it as a major finding. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 40 5. ISSUES, CAVEATS, AND LIMITATIONS While the evaluation employs a rigorous methodology, there are a number of important caveats and limitations that should be borne in mind when interpreting the findings and conclusions. First, two issues related to implementation may lead the evaluation to underestimate the true impact of the program. The first of these is that some aspects of program implementation had already begun prior to baseline data collection. While these activities were limited and we do not expect this is a major issue, it should be noted that our evaluation cannot measure any impacts that did occur prior to our baseline data collection. A more important concern in this regard may be the relatively short time frame over which the evaluation took place as a potential limitation of the analysis. The evaluation covers changes in outcomes over only a 15-18 month period, and program implementation and bunge activities are continuing. Moreover, the early stages of YYC were focused on organization-building (referred to as “activity zero,”) and training and empowering the bunges to choose their focus and activities (the youth-led model), so bunges are still in the early stages in terms of carrying out activities to benefit members. This concern may particularly to relevant to economic outcomes, which may require a longer timeframe to unfold. In this regard, it should be noted that the YYC grant fund was intended to be a key YYC program vehicle for business activities, and therefore improving incomes, and we would expect this mechanism to be in the early stages. Moreover, we can expect that the shift from national to county grant funding, and the subsequent formation of youth led SACCO’s to receive this local funding, slowed this process, and that the economic effects of the SACCO’s and the YYC grants are in an even earlier stage than might have been anticipated. However, the youth-led choice of SACCO’s as a the preferred YYC funding and investment vehicle, and the successful formation of 27 youth-led-, owned, and managed SACCO’s within a year, may prove to be a significant first step to economic empowerment, as it puts into place the foundations for financial inclusion and access to capital by youth. A second set of issues relates to the causal model underlying the empirical analysis. Certain aspects of program implementation create challenges for the causal model and raise the possibility that selection bias may affect the results. Selection bias occurs when the analysis mistakes the influence of other differences between the treatment and comparison groups for the causal impact of the program. The first of these relates to the non-random selection of program areas. From the standpoint of the evaluation, the ideal approach to selecting implementation areas would be to use random assignment of beneficiaries to treatment and comparison groups. In this case, however, the areas in which YYC was implemented were purposefully selected, in part on the basis of potential for post-election violence. Our comparison areas were carefully selected to be as similar as possible to the treatment areas, and our use of propensity score matching and panel data methods with control variables limits the potential for selection bias to the greatest extent possible. However, we cannot completely rule out the possibility that there may have been some important differences between the treatment and comparison groups that we were not able to observe and control for in our analysis. A second source of potential selection bias relates to the fact that participation in the program is voluntary. Not all youths choose to join YYC, and the youths who do participate may have important differences compared with those who do not that also affect outcomes- for example, higher levels of motivation or social connectedness. This creates a challenge because of the fact that in our comparison areas, we cannot observe which youths would have participated in the program had they had the opportunity. As a result, we are comparing a subset of youths who chose to participate in the program in the treatment areas to a broader sample of youths in the comparison areas that also includes youths Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 41 who would not have participated had YYC been offered in their areas. Our use of propensity score matching is an approach to addressing this problem by omitting comparison youths who exhibit significant differences from bunge members in the characteristics that we can observe. However, as above we cannot completely rule out the possibility that there are some differences that we are not able to observe and that affect outcomes. While we cannot completely eliminate these concerns, a number of aspects of the methodology address the possibility of selection bias in the treatment-comparison impact evaluation and reduce it considerably. Our careful selection of comparison areas should result in similar treatment and comparison populations, and our use of propensity score matching and panel data methods further reduces the influence of any bias that might still exist. These measures are designed to make selection of the treatment and comparison groups “effectively random” so that our comparison mimics that of a randomized controlled trial to the greatest extent possible. While we cannot conclusively rule out the possibility that some bias remains, we can nonetheless express a reasonably high degree of confidence that our main conclusions are the result of the causal impact of the program rather than selection bias. Where selection bias is more of a concern is in the second line of analysis of the impact of bunge characteristics. This is because the characteristics of interest that the analysis considers are not determined randomly and likely driven by other factors that may affect outcomes in ways that are difficult to anticipate. As a result, the findings from this portion of the analysis should be interpreted as suggestive. As discussed above, the intention of this analysis is to provide lessons and insights related to the program rather than to definitively establish impacts from an accountability standpoint. Another caveat relates to the possibility of attrition bias. As would be expected given the nature of the YYC population, some of the survey respondents from baseline could not be located and/or re￾interviewed at endline. To the extent that these youths are different from those were able to be re￾interviewed, our results could be affected by “attrition bias” resulting from these differences. Following some exploratory checks of the data, we believe it is unlikely that attrition bias is a major concern in our data. However, more thorough statistical methods could be employed to investigate this possibility. While we were not able to apply these methods due to time constraints, we suggest such an analysis as a future direction in Section 6. Another limitation that should be mentioned is that our evaluation design is not able to account for “spillover effects” that may have occurred to non-YYC areas as a result of the program. Youths who did not participate in YYC but were nonetheless aware of it may have changed their views as a result of observing others participating in the program and succeeding, particularly with respect to empowerment and self-efficacy. In addition, to the extent that youths in the comparison group experienced such changes in outcomes due to YYC, our evaluation findings would tend to underestimate impacts. Finally, due to the complex and interwoven nature of the program components, the local culture, and local politics, the results herein are highly contextual and localized, and we would caution against expecting similar results in another geographic or cultural setting, though general lessons may apply. Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation Final Report FINAL REPORT | 42 6. FUTURE DIRECTIONS The analysis in this report could be usefully extended in a number of ways. First, given the richness of the dataset, future analysis could explore further research hypotheses related to particular aspects of the program as well as differentiated outcomes. In addition, a number of measures could be taken in light of some of the methodological shortcomings and caveats presented in Section 5, including: ALTERNATIVE MODEL SPECIFICATIONS AND ROBUSTNESS CHECKS: As with any empirical analysis, the models used in the analysis rely on a particular set of assumptions. The extent to which the findings are sensitive to these assumptions could be investigated by exploring alternative specifications of the models as well as alternative modelling approaches. It would be useful to experiment with both different sets of control variables in the regressions, as well as alternative specifications of the propensity score, in order to investigate how these choices affect the regression results. In addition, the PSM-trimmed random effects model used in the analysis is not the only modeling approach that could be used. Estimators based on the propensity score such as those described in Imbens (2013) would provide a rigorous means of cross-checking the results that were obtained using the PSM-trimmed random effects model. In addition, further analysis using alternative matching specifications could be used to strengthen the argument for causality in the analysis of variation in treatment due to the potential selection bias discussed in the previous section to identify cases where our observed results may be due to other factors instead of the causal impact of the characteristic of interest. ATTRITION ANALYSIS: As described in Section 5, the rate of survey attrition between baseline and endline was substantial, as would be expected given the nature of the target population. Our preliminary investigation of this issue suggests that sample attrition does not play a major role in driving our results, but further analytical work could verify whether this is the case, identify potential attrition bias, and employ techniques such as attrition weighting to help correct for any biases that are present. DATA IMPUTATION: The quantitative results could be further strengthened using data imputation methods to address cases of item non-response. The large number of variables and observations in the dataset suggests the potential that the data could be used to accurately predict missing values. Use of data imputation would increase the sample size, potentially allowing for smaller impacts to be detected, and reduce the potential for item non-response bias. U.S. Agency for International Development 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20523 May 2014 This publication was produced at the request of the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared independently by NORC at the University of Chicago. ANNEXES Final Report: Yes Youth Can! Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Table of Contents - Annexes | Page i YES YOUTH CAN! IMPACT EVALUATION ANNEXES May 5, 2014 AI D- 61 5- C- 13- 00002 DISCLAIMER The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Table of Contents - Annexes | Page ii TABLE OF CONTENTS - ANNEXES Annex i. Evaluation SOW ........................................................................................................ 1 Annex ii. Statement of Differences ........................................................................................ 13 Annex iii. Questionnaires and FGD/KII Guides...................................................................... 14 a. Baseline Questionnaire – Leader.........................................................................................................15 b. Baseline Questionnaire – Member ...................................................................................................... 23 c. Endline Questionnaire – Leader .......................................................................................................... 58 d. Endline Questionnaire – Member ....................................................................................................... 68 e. Baseline FGD Guide ............................................................................................................................. 103 1.) All Participants – Part 1 ............................................................................................................ 105 2.) YYC Bunge Members ............................................................................................................... 109 3.) YYC Community Members ..................................................................................................... 110 4.) All Participants – Part 2 ............................................................................................................ 111 f. Endline FGD Guide ............................................................................................................................... 112 1.) Bunge Member FGD Guide..................................................................................................... 117 2.) YYC Community Member FGD Guide ................................................................................ 119 3.) Youths in Non-YYC Communities FGD Guide ................................................................. 120 4.) Members of Dissolved Bunges FGD Guide ......................................................................... 121 g. Baseline KII Guide ................................................................................................................................. 122 1.) Key Stakeholder Interview Guide – Implementers, Police, Ministry of Youth Official, Media .................................................................................................................................................. 123 2.) Key Stakeholder Interview Guide – Parents, Church, Councilor, MP, Etc. ................ 126 h. Endline KII Guide ................................................................................................................................... 130 1.) YYC! Participant and Implementer In-Depth Interview Guide ...................................... 135 2.) Broader YYC! Stakeholder In-Depth Interview Guide .................................................... 137 Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics........................................................................... 138 a. Leader Survey – Baseline and Endline .............................................................................................. 138 b. Youth Survey – Baseline and Endline ................................................................................................ 158 Annex v. Qualitative Report ................................................................................................. 194 Annex vi. Technical Report USAID ‘Yes Youth Can’ Endline Evaluation......................... 246 Annex viii. Econometric Results .............................................................................................. 256 Annex ix. Bibliography ........................................................................................................... 261 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex i: SOW | Page 1 ANNEX I. EVALUATION SOW Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex i: SOW | Page 2 SECTION B: STATEMENT OF WORK A.1. BACKGROUND A.1.1. Goal It is widely acknowledged that youth in Kenyan society are largely marginalized. Youth, defined by the Kenya Government as people between 18 and 35 years old, constitutes 36 percent of Kenya’s 40 million people, and approximately 500,000 youth leave school each year. With the encouragement of the GOK, in 2011, USAID/Kenya formally launched the Yes Youth Can! (YYC!) Project, the largest USAID youth project in the world. The purpose of the YYC! Project is to empower Kenyan youth to increase their economic opportunities, create self-reliant organizations, improve their voice in local, regional and national policy dialogue, and expand access to essential services that are more youth-friendly. The $47.925 million is an innovative, large-scale and unique youth empowerment project covering a three-year period and focused in provinces of Kenya where 2007-2008 post-election violence was most acute, or where there was a possibility of election-related violence. The Project includes six regional awards of about $2.5 million each, a national award of $23 million, plus a variety of other activities including monitoring and evaluation. A.1.2. Project Objectives The YYC! Project has been geared toward sustaining Kenya's post-election recovery and was expected to empower youth by providing robust support to address the multiple facets of youth livelihoods that impede their ability to develop diverse viable entrepreneurial skills and employment opportunities; engage youth as citizens in local and national issues that affect them, and; empower them to be positive forces for change in their communities. YYC! Project design approached authentic empowerment of youth by means of ensuring youth ownership at all levels in every activity, including the internal dynamics of project decision￾making. It was designed to enhance leadership capabilities of the youth themselves for self￾development, and to expand the genuine voice of youth in promoting youth interests and building the capacity of youth organizations to be effective agents of change. By addressing one of the key agents of the 2007-2008 post-election violence — youth without voice or opportunity — it had been expected that the YYC! Project will help reduce the possibility of violence prior to the national elections that were held in March 2012. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex i: SOW | Page 3 YYC! has sought to provide a new framework for youth to gain access to assets, services and tangible benefits to shape their own future. It had been intended to create new institutional drivers that would become completely youth-owned, youth-led and youth-managed. It included an "Innovate for Change Fund" that will provide both loans and asset capitalization grants to youth throughout the country; a new national, yet grassroots-based youth network, to connect youth for a greater voice in national and local affairs; and a youth think-tank to analyze national and devolved policies for youth-friendliness and international best practice that would give youth better information to shape their advocacy efforts. The underlying theory of change was that creating youth-run, youth-driven institutions will provide new opportunities to exercise leadership based on direct service provision and transparency, and this learning-by-doing will have enhanced youth transitions to adulthood, improving national governance, democratizing the economy and building inter-ethnic solidarity. The YYC! Project had five objectives: 1. Increase economic prospects for youth through skills development and access to finance to create: economically viable microenterprises; self-reliant community level economic development projects; and employment opportunities. 2. Improve youth voice in local, regional, and national policy dialogue through enhanced advocacy capabilities and inter-ethnic dialogue. 3. Expand youth access to essential services that are more youth￾friendly. 4. Establish new institutional arrangements that can leverage public and private resources through youth-managed organizations. 5. Create a new approach to empower youth through youth-owned, youth-led and youth￾managed actions. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! SOW | Page 4 A.1.3 Project Activities The Project was divided geographically to the following Implementing Partners (IPs): Project Name Partner Name A/COR or Activity Manager Award Number Award Amount (TEC) Project Start Date Project End Date Yes Youth Can Central Mercy Corps Pamela Wesonga AID‐623‐A‐11‐00018 $ 2,542,644 3/11/2011 11/10/2013 Yes Youth Can Coast (and Nairoi, starting 2/1/14) Cooperative League of the USA Pamela Wesonga AID‐623‐A‐11‐00012 $ 5,194,918 2/1/2011 5/19/2014 Yes Youth Can Nairobi Inuka Kenya Trust Pamela Wesonga AID-623-A-11-00026 $ 2,453,817 5/20/2011 1/31/2013 Yes Youth Can National Mercy Corps Rosemary Wanjala AID‐623‐A‐11‐00030 $ 23,000,000 7/7/2011 7/6/2014 Yes Youth Can Nyanza World Vision Rosemary Wanjala AID‐623‐A‐11‐00024 $ 2,497,928 5/20/2011 5/19/2014 Yes Youth Can Rift Valley Mercy Corps Pamela Wesonga AID‐623‐A‐11‐00019 $ 3,299,738 3/7/2011 11/6/2013 Yes Youth Can Western Winrock International Rosemary Wanjala AID‐623‐A‐11‐00017 $ 3,098,996 2/23/2011 11/22/2013 At the end of the three-year YYC! Project period, USAID expected that: 1. A new, successful model of engaging youth as decision-makers and leaders in the development of their communities will have been demonstrated. 2. New livelihood opportunities, largely through self-employment, will have been created that break through market barriers. 3. Youth will have achieved a greater voice and role in governance and civic affairs. 4. National grassroots-based networks will have been established to serve as a platform for youth to promote their own development. A.2. STATEMENT OF WORK A.2.1. Evaluation Purpose Under this task order, NORC will conduct an Endline Impact Evaluation Survey and Analysis of the YYC! Project. The period to be evaluated is Feb 2011 to May 2014. In early 2012, USAID/Kenya engaged the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago as the approved subcontractor to dTS under USAID/Kenya’s Performance, Analysis, Monitoring and Evaluation (PACE) Project’s Work Order (WO) #9: Yes Youth Can! Impact Evaluation. NORC began evaluation design and baseline analysis services under the approved PACE Work Order #9 in March 2012. An approved schedule of deliverables Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex i: SOW | Page 5 included a Phase I: Baseline Survey and Analysis provided in December 2012, a Phase II: Midline Survey and Analysis to be conducted from April-June 2013 and a Phase III: End line Survey and Analysis to be conducted at the conclusion of YYC! Project in FY 2014. In June of 2012, USAID/Kenya notified dTS of its intent to terminate the PACE contract, and dTS ceased all services on October 15, 2012. NORC had been a capable subcontractor and was contracted directly to complete the Phase I: Baseline Survey and Analysis on January 30, 2013. Due to information obtained in the baseline survey, the Phase II Midline Survey was cancelled. USAID/Kenya has now decided to conduct the Phase III Endline Survey and Impact Evaluation as soon as possible so that it may inform a follow-on project design. This YYC! Endline Impact Evaluation will follow-on and directly build upon the YYC! Impact Evaluation - Baseline Analysis in order to assess the causal impact of the YYC! Project. This endline survey and analysis will employ an identical methodology and questionnaires as the baseline survey which is detailed in the “Yes Youth Can! Evaluation Design Report” (Appendix A), delivered to USAID/Kenya by dTS on May 7, 2012. The dual goals of the impact evaluation are accountability and learning, and can be best served by a rigorous impact evaluation framework that provides scientifically defensible answers to important questions related to the project’s value and lessons that can be applied in future programming and similar contexts. A.2.2. Key Evaluation Questions USAID/Kenya believes YYC! to be a groundbreaking approach to youth programming, and expects that the evaluation will be key in evaluating its impact and replicability. USAID’s desire is that the results provide reliable information for the entire development partner community on how to promote change with youth through empowerment programs. Therefore, high-level objectives of the evaluation include: (a) Establishing a clear impact evaluation framework for youth programming at a national scale by linking output indicators required by results framework with outcome indicators desired by USAID and impact results demanded by youth; (b) Designing and implementing a rigorous impact evaluation suitable for the context. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex i: SOW | Page 6 As the YYC! Project sought to address the underlying causes of social, economic, and political marginalization, the baseline evaluation considered the impact of the project on a wide range of outcomes, originally conceptualized in terms of the following five categories:  Economic outcomes such as income and employment;  Political empowerment and inclusion, including participants’ sense of their own ability to effect change through the political system as well as a greater tendency to engage with government on matters of concern to them;  Trust and social capital in the form of participant’s perceptions of community cohesion and inclusiveness;  Attitudes/behaviors towards ethnicity and violence;  Self-efficacy and relating to others. The baseline evaluation focused on two sets of questions revolving around these five categories: 1) the impact of participating in YYC! as compared to the counterfactual (i.e., what outcomes would have been in the absence of YYC!); and 2) how characteristics of the bunges (such as purpose, frequency of meetings, performance of board members, etc.) lead to differences in outcomes among YYC! participants. Accordingly, in order to evaluate the outcomes envisioned under these key categories—each linked to a causal outcome—the following Evaluation Questions were formulated and will need to be addressed in this current end line survey and analysis: 1) Does participating in YYC! and/or participating in bunges with particular characteristics lead to improved economic outcomes? If so, how? What bunge characteristics are particularly important in this regard? 2) Does participating in YYC! lead to closer engagement with government and political leaders? Do YYC youths experience a greater sense of political empowerment in terms of their beliefs about their own capacity to effect meaningful and peaceful change through the political system? 3) Does YYC! lead to greater social inclusion for youths in the broader community, particularly across ethnic lines? Does YYC! foster leadership qualities that are reflected in behavior extending beyond the project itself? 4) Have attitudes towards violence and ethnicity changed on the part of youths who participate in YYC!? What are the characteristics of bunges that are more or less effective in terms of influencing this outcome? In practice, has YYC! reduced the incidence of post￾election violence following the 2012-3 presidential election? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex i: SOW | Page 7 5) Does YYC! have a positive impact on psychological outcomes such as self-efficacy and relatedness to others for participants? What are the characteristics of bunges that are particularly successful or unsuccessful in this regard? A.2.3. Evaluation Design and Data Collection Methods As detailed in Appendix A and carried out in the baseline analysis, data will be obtained by administering a survey questionnaire to 10,000 youth, with 2/3 of the respondents consisting of bunge members and the remaining 1/3 a control group selected from geographically proximate areas where YYC! is not active. In conjunction with the individual survey, the evaluation shall collect bunge-level data for each of the approximately 650 bunges represented in the original survey. Lastly, this final evaluation will include qualitative information to help explain and frame the results as well as investigate additional issues. The qualitative data, as carried out in the baseline analysis, will be generated through focus group discussions (FGD) and key informant interviews (KII) in a similar fashion as discussed in the original evaluation design. The analysis of the data should proceed along the three lines detailed in the Design Report. First, outcomes for YYC! participants will be compared with outcomes for non-YYC! participants to examine the causal impact of participating in the project. Second, outcomes will be compared across YYC! participants who have had different experiences. Lastly, the analysis will examine the impact of the project on the incidence of post-election violence. In all stages, the evaluation analysis will look at outcomes disaggregated by sex, age cohort, gender and ethnic minority status. Each of these analyses will employ a quasi-experimental design. The audience of this evaluation is USAID, the implementing partners, the Government of Kenya, and the wider international development community. The findings of the evaluation will be used to inform future youth programming in Kenya and throughout USAID. The findings will be shared with USAID/Kenya initially, for subsequent discussion with the implementing partners, so that they can improve on areas that are recommended for strengthening during the balance of project implementation. The Final Report, once approved by USAID, will also be posted to the Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC). This evaluation shall meet the requirements outlined in the USAID Evaluation Policy. Methodological Strengths and Limitations To be sure, various operating constraints and limitations to conducting an impact evaluation of the YYC! Project were identified during the baseline survey and analysis, including: Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex i: SOW | Page 8 Comparison group: There are difficulties for identifying a comparison group upon which a plausible counterfactual can be based. To mitigate this risk, an important focus of the evaluation will be to consider the impact of variations in bunge-level characteristics on outcomes in addition to the treatment-control approach. Distribution of bunge-level characteristics: An important focus of the evaluation is an examination of the impact of variation in bunge-level characteristics (such as purpose, frequency of meetings, performance of board members, etc.) and how this will lead to differences in outcomes among YYC! participants. As mentioned in the original design, a large sample size could potentially enable careful and rigorous analysis of the distribution and effect of these characteristics. Project implementation prior to baseline survey: The impact evaluation should have included a baseline survey that was completed prior to the implementation of any project activities. However, “Activity Zero,1” as well as some additional YYC! activities, had already begun; thus, the first round of data collection was not a true baseline. A larger sample size, allowing a more rigorous evaluation of control and treatment groups, was proposed and utilized to help analyze project impacts vis-à-vis no intervention. This final survey and analysis must acknowledge and strive to mitigate these limitations during implementation and reporting. B.1. KEY PERSONNEL Evaluation Team Composition The evaluation team is expected to be staffed, ideally by two or three personnel as outlined below: One Project Director (Principal Investigator) who will be primarily responsible for communicating with USAID/Kenya, designing the evaluation, supervising the evaluation team and survey firm for data quality, leading the analyses, drafting and presenting the baseline report. Minimum experience includes a Ph.D. in relevant field and 10 years of experience in impact evaluation. 1 Activity zero was added in order to mobilize youth at the grassroots level. In this primary YYC! activity, partners mobilized youth in a given geographic area (usually the village level) to form Youth Bunges that register as self-help groups. Constitution and by-laws were enacted during Activity Zero to ensure that bunges are able to select their own leaders that will directly represent them in forums at the county and national levels. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex i: SOW | Page 9 The Project Director will be the primary responsible party for designing the evaluation, supervising the project, and for ensuring delivery of quality deliverables on time. He or she should have experience conducting and managing impact evaluations in developing countries. Experience in conducting youth related evaluations is a plus. He or she should have experience coordinating with developing-country local NGOs and survey firms for the design and implementation of impact evaluations, including addressing weaknesses as needed. One mid to Senior Analyst/Survey Coordinator to help the PI in developing the sampling frame, training the survey firm and ensuring data quality. Minimum experience includes a Master’s degree in relevant field/social sciences and 5 years of experience in impact evaluation, survey design, formulating sampling frames, training survey firms and experience in managing large surveys in Africa. The Senior Analyst/Survey Coordinator will ensure quality of the design especially in establishing a sampling frame, training of survey firms, and implementation of all relevant surveys. A well-qualified mid to Junior Analyst to be present in the field for at least six weeks during the survey to ensure smooth implementation of surveys. Minimum experience includes Bachelors degree, 2 years of experience in survey implementation. The above two or three Key Personnel will need to travel to Kenya and may only be replaced during the life of the contract with the written permission from USAID/Kenya. Note that an experienced and reputable local survey firm, approved by USAID, will conduct the surveys using the instruments prepared by the NORC evaluation team, input the data and compile a clean data set with documentation. The survey firm will provide team leaders, supervisors, survey enumerators, data entry and validation crew. The survey firm is expected to be trained and supervised for data quality by NORC. All staff involved in this evaluation shall provide a written disclosure of any potential conflicts of interest, which shall be immediately sent to the Contracting Officer, before beginning work on the project. B.2. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE The baseline assessment was conducted in the summer of 2012. This endline evaluation should be carried out September through January 2014. The place of performance must include a nationwide random sample of youth bunges or county-level villages. B.2.1. Evaluation Management USAID/Kenya will provide overall direction to the evaluation team, identify key documents, implementing partners, site visit locations and assist in facilitating the work plan. The evaluation Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex i: SOW | Page 10 team shall be responsible for arranging all meetings during the course of the evaluation and advising USAID/Kenya prior to those meetings. The evaluation team shall be responsible for arranging all domestic travel within Kenya as well as its own hotel arrangements, office space and office equipment usage. Evaluation team members are required to make their own payments. B.2.2. Participation USAID/Kenya representatives, if available, will participate on the evaluation team implementing the surveys to observe field data collection. C.1. CONTRACT DATA REQUIREMENTS LIST An illustrative timeline for deliverable submission can be found below. Because the specific timing of data collection is still to be determined, this deliverable timeline will likely need to be adjusted. Deliverables Illustrative Due Date Place of performance #1: Detailed workplan,survey instruments and training manuals Two weeks after finalizing Award (September 6, 2013) Home office #2: USAID/Kenya approval 5 days after #1 (Sept 13, 2013) USAID/Kenya #3: Weekly Reports (1‐2 pgs) outlining progress made, challenges encountered, and any initial findings of concern Weekly Kenya #4: Debriefing by the PI on the survey and initial findings with Power Point at USAID/Kenya and Initial Analysis Report Week of January 13, 2014 USAID/Kenya #5: Draft Endline Report 10 days after #4 Home office #6: USAID/Kenya Approval/Comments 10 days after #5 Kenya #7: Final Endline Impact Evaluation Report and Presentation to stakeholders 10 days after #6 USAID/Kenya #8: USAID/Kenya Approval/Comments 10 days after #7 USAID/Kenya Note: The number of days refers to workdays. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex i: SOW | Page 11 C.1.1. REPORT FORMAT The format for the evaluation report shall be as follows, and the report shall be a maximum of 35 pages not including annexes. The report format should be restricted to Microsoft products and 12-point font should be used throughout the body of the report, with 1” page margins. Four bound hard copies shall be submitted, and an electronic copy in MS Word. In addition, all raw data collected by the evaluation will be provided to USAID in an electronic file in an easily readable format; organized and fully documented for use by those not fully familiar with the project or the evaluation. If the report contains any potentially procurement sensitive information, a second version report excluding this information will be submitted (also electronically, in English) for dissemination among stakeholders and on the Development Information Clearinghouse. The evaluation team is responsible for ensuring that the final evaluation report is compliant with USAID’s Evaluation Policy, specifically Appendix 1. 1. Executive Summary—(3-5 pages) that summarized key points such as project purpose and background, key evaluation questions, methods, findings, conclusions and recommendations. 2. Table of Contents (1 pg); 3. Introduction—purpose, audience, and synopsis of task (1-2 pg); 4. Background—brief overview of development problem, USAID project strategy and activities implemented to address the problem, and purpose of the evaluation (2-3 pg); 5. Methodology—justify evaluation design and methods, including constraints and gaps (3-5 pgs); 6. Findings/Conclusions/Recommendations—for each evaluation question, including recommendations for subsequent project redesign and implementation. Recommendations must be action-oriented, practical and specific, with defined responsibility for the action (14-22 pgs); 7. Issues—provide a list of key technical and/or administrative, if any (1–2 pgs); 8. Future Directions (2-3 pgs); 9. Annexes —that document the evaluation methods, schedules, interview lists and tables should be succinct, pertinent and readable. These include references to bibliographical documentation, meetings, interviews and focus group discussions. At a minimum, they shall include:  Evaluation SOW  Any “statements of differences” regarding significant unresolved differences of opinion by funders, implementors, and/or members of the evaluation team Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex i: SOW | Page 12  All tools, such as questionnaires, checklists, survey instruments, and discussion guides  All sources of information, properly identified and listed C.2. PAYMENT Payment will be disbursed in four installments based on the acceptance of deliverables as outlined above and as follows: Deliverable 1: COR acceptance of detailed workplan, survey instruments and training manuals – 25% payment Deliverable 4: COR acceptance of debriefing by the PI on the survey and initial findings with Power Point at USAID/Kenya and Initial Analysis Report – 25% payment Deliverable 7&8: COR acceptance of Final Endline Impact Evaluation Report and Presentation to stakeholders and USAID/Kenya Approval/Comments – 50% payment [End of Statement of work] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii | Page 13 ANNEX II. STATEMENT OF DIFFERENCES The Evaluation Team received no formal indication of differences on the part of stakeholders that would need to be included here. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii | Page 14 ANNEX III. QUESTIONNAIRES AND FGD/KII GUIDES Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Leader | Page 15 A. BASELINE QUESTIONNAIRE – LEADER Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Leader | Page 16 Bunge-Leader Questionnaire Bunge code: |__|__|__| Name of Bunge ________________ Village _______________________ Sub-location ___________________ A1 Which activities does the bunge participate in? [select all that apply] AGRICULTURE 01 CROP FARMING (TEA, COFFEE, BANANA, SUGARCANE, GROUNDNUTS, ALOE VERA, VEGETABLES, MUSHROOMS, FLOWERS, RICE, NAPIER GRASS, ETC) 02 TREE NURSERIES/GREENHOUSES 03 AGRO-FORESTRY/PLANTING TREES 04 AQUACULTURE/FISHPONDS/FISHING 05 IRRIGATION SCHEME 06 ORGANIC FARMING 07 PROVIDING LABOR/WORKERS FOR HIRE 08 PROVIDING OR ACQUIRING FARMING EQUIPMENT 09 OTHER AGRICULTURE AGRIBUSINESS/FOOD-RELATED ACTIVITY 10 CROP SALES (VEGETABLES, FRUITS, OTHER CROPS) 11 SEEDLING SALES 12 FISH SALES/FISH STORAGE 13 ANIMAL BYPRODUCTS SALES (EGGS, MILK, ETC) 14 FOOD PROCESSING (TOMATO PASTE, MAIZE FLOUR, MAIZE GRINDER, FRUIT JUICES, PALM PRODUCTS) 15 OTHER FOOD-RELATED ACTIVITY (E.G. BAKED GOODS) 16 OTHER AGRIBUSINESS ACTIVITY (E.G. CHICKEN FEED PROCESSING) ANIMAL HUSBANDRY 17 LIVESTOCK RAISING (COWS, PIGS, SHEEP, GOATS, POULTRY, RABBITS, ETC) 18 LIVESTOCK SALES (COWS, PIGS, SHEEP, GOATS, POULTRY, RABBITS, ETC) 19 ANIMAL BYPRODUCTS PRODUCTION (EGGS, MILK, ETC) 20 MANURE PRODUCTION/MANURE TRANSFORMATION 21 BEEKEEPING/HONEY PRODUCTION AND SALES 22 OTHER ANIMAL-RELATED ACTIVITIES (CATTLE DIP PREPARATION, ZERO GRAZING IN SMALL SCALE FARMS, POULTRY INCUBATORS ETC) TRADE/BUSINESS/SERVICES 23 MECHANIC/VEHICLES/TRANSPORT (REPAIR, SALES, BATTERING CHARGING, FUEL SALES, CAR WASH, ETC) 24 TABLE BANKING OR MERRY GO ROUND 25 FORMAL ACCESS TO CREDIT A2 If it had the chance, which other activities would the bunge participate in? Please select 2. A3.1 Of the activities you told me that the bunge participates in, which would you say is the most important focus of the bunge? [select 1] A3.2 Which one is the second most important focus? [select 1] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Leader | Page 17 A3.3 Which one is the third most important focus? [select 1] 26 INFORMAL INSURANCE 27 ACCESS TO FORMAL INSURANCE 28 COMMUNITY SUPPORT ACTIVITIES/SOCIAL WORK (VOLUNTARISM, FUNERAL ASSISTANCE, ADVOCACY, ETC) 29 ENTERTAINMENT/TOURISM (ART PERFORMANCES, ECO-TOURISM, MUSEUMS, ETC) 30 COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES (CYBER CAFÉ, RUNNING ICT CENTER, PHOTOCOPY, ETC) 31 HOSPITALITY (CATERING, RESTAURANT, ETC) 32 RETAIL/RETAIL SHOPS (BARBERSHOP, CLOTHES SALES, SHOE REPAIR, ETC) 33 MANUFACTURING (SOAP MAKING, BASKETRY, JEWELRY, EMBROIDERING, ETC) 34 CONSTRUCTION (WELL DIGGING, BUILDING TOILETS, BRICK MAKING, TIMBER HARVESTING, ETC) 35 RECYCLING (GARBAGE RECYCLING, CHARCOAL RECYCLING, ETC) 36 OTHER BUSINESS, TRADE, SERVICE ACTIVITIES (GARBAGE COLLECTION, CHILD CARE, LAUNDRY, ETC) COMMUNITY AWARENESS/TRAINING/COMMUNITY SERVICE 37 SOCIAL ACTIVITIES (PEACE BUILDING ACTIVITIES, YOUTH MOBILIZATION) 38 TRAININGS (HIV/AIDS AWARENESS, GIRLS EARLY MARRIAGE AWARENESS, FGM, FARMER TRAINING, ETC) 39 EDUCATION-RELATED ACTIVITIES (OPERATING A SCHOOL, ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION, RELIGIOUS EDUCATION) 40 OTHER A4 When was the bunge formed? (mm/yyyy) Which of the following are true about the bunge: A5.1 The bunge is registered 1 YES 2 No but we have applied  A6.1 3 NO have not applied yet A6.1 A5.2 When was the bunge registered? (mm/yyyy) A6.1 The bunge has a workplan 1 YES 2 NO A7.1 A6.2 When was the workplan created? (mm/yyyy) A7.1 The bunge has a bank account 1 YES 2 NO A8.1 A7.2 When was the bank account opened? (mm/yyyy) A8.1 The bunge has applied for funds from Tahidi Youth Fund 1 YES 2 NO A9.1 A8.2 When did you apply for funds? (mm/yyyy) A9.1 The bunge has applied for funds from elsewhere 1 YES 2 NO A10.1 A9.2 Where else have you applied for funds? A10.1 The bunge has a gold, silver, or bronze ranking 1 YES 2 NO A11.1 A10.2 Please specify which ranking. 1 GOLD 2 SILVER 3 BRONZE Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Leader | Page 18 A11 Someone from the bunge has attended a county forum 1 YES 2 NO A12 Someone from the bunge has been elected to the county or national bunge 1 YES 2 NO A13 The bunge has received trainings 1 YES 2 NO A14 A13.1a Training 1: Type/Topic A13.1b Training 1: Number of sessions A13.2a Training 2: Type/Topic A13.2b Training 2: Number of sessions A13.3a Training 3: Type/Topic A13.3b Training 3: Number of sessions A13.4a Training 4: Type/Topic [open-ended for now] A13.4b Training 4: Number of sessions [numeric] A13.5a Training 5: Type/Topic [open-ended for now] A13.5b Training 5: Number of sessions [numeric] A14 How often does the bunge meet? 01 WEEKLY OR MORE OFTEN 02 EVERY TWO WEEKS 03 EVERY MONTH 04 EVERY OTHER MONTH OR SO 05 LESS THAN ONCE EVERY OTHER MONTH A15 How often did the bunge used to meet during the first six months after creation? 01 WEEKLY OR MORE OFTEN 02 EVERY TWO WEEKS 03 EVERY MONTH 04 EVERY OTHER MONTH OR SO 05 LESS THAN ONCE EVERY OTHER MONTH A16 When will the next annual meeting be held? (mm/yyyy) A17 When will the next elections of officers/board members be held? (mm/yyyy) Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Leader | Page 19 A18 How many members total are currently in the bunge? A19 What ethnicities are represented in your bunge? [ALL THAT APPLY] 01 KIKUYU 02 LUO 03 LUHYA 04 KAMBA 05 MERU 06 KISII 07 KALENJIN 08 MASAI 09 MIJIKENDA 10 TAITA 11 SOMALI 12 POKOT 13 TURKANA 14 BAJUNI 15 KURIA 16 TESO 17 RENDILLE 18 EMBU 19 BORANA 20 SAMBURU 21 ARAB 22 SWAHILI 23 INDIAN 24 KENYAN ONLY (DOESN’T THINK OF SELF IN THOSE TERMS) 99 OTHER(SPECIFY: ___________) A20 What percentage of the members attend more than half of the meetings? A21 Since the bunge formed, have any members dropped out? (i.e. members who have stopped participating in any bunge activities and you don’t expect them to participate in the future) 1 YES 2 NO  A22 A21.a How many members have dropped out since the bunge formed? Please give your best estimate. A22 About what proportion of the youths in this community are part of the bunge? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Leader | Page 20 A23 a) Does your bunge raise funds from [SOURCE]? b) How much did the bunge raise from [SOURCE] in the past 12 months? A23.1 Member dues/Subscriptions 1 YES 2 NO A23.2 Economic activities 1 YES 2 NO A23.3 Donors 1 YES 2 NO A24 Before the bunge was formed, were the members already part of a group (such as a self￾help association, sports or drama club, a religious group, an NGO, etc)? 1 YES 2 NOA25 A24.a If so, what kind of group? A25 Before the bunge was formed, how many of the members knew each other? 01 all or almost all 02 most 03 less than half 04 none or very few A26 How did the original members learn about YYC? 01 from a mobilizer 02 from members of another bunge 03 other A27 How often does the mobilizer talk to you about YYC activities? 1 weekly 2 once every two weeks 3 monthly 4 less than monthly 5 never A28 Are there organizations that provide funding, training, organize events, or facilitate employment opportunities etc that work with the youth in this area? 1 YES 2 NO  to roster A29 These organizations are they? (multiple responses possible) 1 NGOs 2 Government offices or ministries 3 religious organizations -7 Don’t know  to roster -8 Refused  to roster Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Leader | Page 21 A30 Which Non Government Organizations (NGOs) work with the youth in this area? A30b. In general, what activities do these organizations do with the youth in this area? [open ended, list up to 6] 01 Provide funding 02 Business skills training 03 Health awareness training 04 Leadership training 05 Networking opportunities with other NGOs 06 Organize events 07 Provide material inputs 08 Assist in finding employment opportunities 09 Scholarships A31 Which Government offices or ministries work with the youth in this area? A31b. In general, what activities do these organizations do with the youth in this area? [open ended, list up to 6] 01 Provide funding 02 Business skills training 03 Health awareness training 04 Leadership training 05 Networking opportunities with other NGOs 06 Organize events 07 Provide material inputs 08 Assist in finding employment opportunities 09 Scholarships A32 Which Religious Organisations work with the youth in this area? A32b. In general, what activities do these organizations do with the youth in this area? [open ended, list up to 6] 01 Provide funding 02 Business skills training 03 Health awareness training 04 Leadership training 05 Networking opportunities with other NGOs 06 Organize events 07 Provide material inputs 08 Assist in finding employment opportunities 09 Scholarships B. BUNGE ROSTER TO BE COMPLETED FOR ALL PERSONS IN THE BUNGE (UP TO 150) Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Leader | Page 22 B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 MEM￾BER ID Please tell me the name of each of the members of the bunge Please note that no names will be entered in order to protect your privacy. What is [NAME]’s gender? 1 MALE 2 FEMALE How many years old was [NAME] on (his/her) last birthday? 1 18-25 years old 2 26-35 years old 3 over 35 years old What is [NAME]’s position within the bunge? 1 officer/member of the board 2 official member next member 3 non-official member next member What is [NAME]’s level of education? (ONLY FOR OFFICERS) When was [NAME] elected? (ONLY FOR OFFICERS) Does [NAME] intend to stand for election again? 1 YES 2 NO (ONLY FOR OFFICERS) 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 23 B. BASELINE QUESTIONNAIRE – MEMBER Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! COVER SHEET Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 24 KENYA YES YOUTH CAN SURVEY – YOUTH QUESTIONNAIRE (Baseline Questionnaire) INTERVIEW Enumerator No. |__|__|__| Date (DD/MM/YYYY) |__|__|/|__|__|/|__|__|__|__| Data Clerk No. 1 |__|__|__| Date (DD/MM/YYYY) |__|__|/|__|__|/|__|__|__|__| Editor No.|__|__|__| Date (DD/MM/YYYY) |__|__|/|__|__|/|__|__|__|__| Data Clerk No. 2 |__|__|__| Date (DD/MM/YYYY) |__|__|/|__|__|/|__|__|__|__| Supervisor No.|__|__|__| Date (DD/MM/YYYY) |__|__|/|__|__|/|__|__|__|__| Validated? □ (check after validation) REGION: CODE |__|__|__|NAME: _____________________________________________________________________________ PROVINCE/DISTRICT: CODE |__|__|__| NAME: _____________________________________________________________________________ VILLAGE/TOWN: CODE |__|__|__| NAME: _____________________________________________________________________________ BUNGE: CODE |__|__|__| NAME: _____________________________________________________________________________ RESPONDENT #: CODE |__|__|__|__|__| GIS LOCATION OF RESPONDENT LATITUDE (N/S) |__| – DEGREES:|__|__| MINUTES: |__|__| . |__|__|__| LONGITUDE (E/W) |__| – DEGREES: |__|__|__|MINUTES: |__|__| .|__|__|__| INTERVIEWER/SUPERVISOR COMMENTS: Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! ENUMERATOR RESERVE CODES: -9=REFUSED; -8=DON’T KNOW; -7=NOT APPLICABLE Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 25 INTRODUCTION AND CONSENT Hello and thank you for talking to us. We are from TNS working with dTS in Kenya. We are visiting here today conducting a survey to better understand the lives of young people such as yourself. This information is important to know as it will give us information on the role of youths in Kenyan society. The interview will take about XX minutes and we will ask questions to you about particular topics related to being a youth or young adult in Kenya. This survey may be repeated in the future to determine if there are changes in the lives of young people. In order for us to be able to contact you about these future surveys, I will collect your name and locating information at the end of this survey. The information you give, including your name and locating information, will be stored safely for the duration of the project to help us locate you in the future. The information that you provide will be kept until at least 2015 for the purposes of preparing reports to the project sponsor. Your participation is completely voluntary. You are free to not answer any question with which you are not comfortable, and you may stop the interview at any time. If you have any questions about the survey, you may contact XXX at TNS at XXX-XXX-XXX. May we start now? AA1. INTERVIEW START TIME |__|__|:|__|__| AA2. a. What is your first name? b. What is your surname? _____________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ Response to consent (1YES 2NO) |__| Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! ENUMERATOR RESERVE CODES: -9=REFUSED; -8=DON’T KNOW; -7=NOT APPLICABLE Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 26 SECTION AA. LOCATING INFORMATION As I mentioned before, we are hoping to interview the same people in 2013. As such, I’d first like to collect some information that will help us locate you in the future. This information will not be kept as part of the survey data and will only be used to help us locate you for the future rounds of this survey and for other important surveys. AA1 Do you plan on moving in the next 2 years? 1 YES 2 NO AA4 AA2 Where do you plan on moving to? Region AA3 Village AA4 What is your mobile telephone number or a number you have access to? AA5 What is your email address? AA6 Do you have a Facebook account? If so, what is the name on the account? AA7 Is there are family member or friend who lives nearby and would be able to help us locate you when we carry out the study in the future? 1 YES 2 NO  SECTION A AA8 Please provide me with the following information about that person: Relationship AA9 Name AA10 Phone Number AA11 Location Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 27 SECTION A: BUNGE INFORMATION Now, I would like to ask you some questions about the bunge/youth village group/nisisi! Chapter A1 When did you join the bunge? (year/month) A2 People have different reasons for wanting to join the bunge. I'm going to tell you some reasons we have heard from other people about why they joined the bunge. Can you tell me the most important reason reasons why you joined the bunge? 01 I joined for economic reasons (for instance, I hoped to earn more money, the bunge will assist me to start a business, it can open employment opportunities for me in the future) 02 I joined for social/community reasons (for instance, I wanted to participate in the activity that bunge is organized around, my friends said I should join the bunge, to be educated on the community and to help my community, to give back to society) 03 I joined for political reasons A3 Do you hold a leadership position within the bunge? 1 YES 2 NO A4 A3.a Which position do you hold? 01 PRESIDENT 02 VICE-PRESIDENT 03 SECRETARY 04 TREASURER/ACCOUNTANT 99 OTHER (SPECIFY) A4 How often does the bunge hold meetings? 01 weekly or more often 02 every two weeks 03 every month 04 every other month or so 05 less than once every other month A5 How often do you attend these meetings? 01 frequently A7 02 sometimes 03 only rarely 04 never or almost never A6 Why don’t you attend meetings more regularly? 01 I DON’T FEEL WELCOME 02 I DON’T THINK GOING TO THE MEETINGS COULD BENEFIT ME 03 MEETING TIMES DON’T MATCH MY SCHEDULE 99 OTHER Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 28 A7 How often have each of the following topics been discussed at bunge meetings 01 frequently 02 sometimes 03 only rarely 04 never A7.1 Politics A7.2 Ethnic issues A7.3 Issues that are important to women, such as gender based violence, [others] A7.4 Starting or operating businesses A7.5 Getting jobs A7.6 Relationships between youth and others in the community A8 Have others in the community who are not members of the bunge tried to interfere with what the bunge is doing? 1 YES 2 NOA10 A9 Has this been a problem for the bunge? 1 yes a big problem 2 somewhat of a problem 3 not a problem A10 Does it ever happen that members of the bunge have problems that cause them to become angry with one another? 01 often 02 sometimes 03 never or almost never I am going to read you some statements about the bunge. Please tell me which of the following is true about being part of the bunge. STATEMENTS A13. Which of the following would you say is true about being part of the bunge 1 TRUE 2 NOT TRUE A14. If yes, how big of a difference has it made? Has it made… 01 a big difference? 02 somewhat of a difference? 03 only a small difference? a It has helped me to earn more money b It has brought people from different ethnicities closer together c It has helped me to have a voice in influencing the national government d It has helped me to have a voice in influencing the local government e It has brought the members closer to the rest of the community f It is a safe place where I can discuss issues that I wouldn’t be able to discuss anywhere else Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 29 Now I would like to ask you some questions about the bunge leaders/officials. A15 Did all of the members of the bunge have the opportunity to participate in choosing the bunge leaders? 1 YES 2 NO A16 Were any of the members of the bunge disappointed about who was chosen as a bunge leader? 1 yes, very much 2 somewhat 3 not at all A14 In general, how good of a job do you think they’re doing? 1 excellent 2 good 3 fair 4 poor 5 very poor Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 30 SECTION B. ECONOMIC OUTCOMES Now I would like to ask you about your economic activities. I would like to ask you about activities that you may have done in the past month and in the past 12 months to make a living. Have you done any of the following to make a living: a) Over the past 12 months? 1 YES 2 NO  NEXT b) Over the past one month? 1 YES 2 NO B1.1 Grow crops, raise livestock, conduct business activities together with other members of the bunge or as part of bunge activities? B1.2 Work for someone who is not a member of your household for wages or a salary- for example working for an employer, a firm, the Government, or working for a jua kali or some other person outside your household? B1.3 Grow crops on a plot owned or rented by you or your household? (This is different from the previous question when I asked if you worked for someone elsefor wages or a salary) B1.4 Raise livestock owned by you or your household? B1.5 Conduct business activities for yourself or your household? For example, operating a small business selling something, operating a fishing boat, operating ajua kali, or other independent work? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 31 Subsection B2: Bunge activities [ask if YES to B1.1] You indicated that you did some activities together with other members of the bunge or as part of bunge activities. I would like to ask you about the activities you worked on with other members of the bunge to earn money. Did you earn money from any of the following: a) Over the past 12 months? 1 YES 2 NO  NEXT b) Over the past one month? 1 YES 2 NO B2.1 Growing crops on a field you worked with other bunge members B2.2 Livestock activities with other bunge members (specify) B2.3 Business activities with other bunge members (specify) [COMPLETE IF SAID YES TO B2.1] B2.4 B2.5 B2.6 CODES FOR B2.4 10 MAHANGU 11 MAIZE 12 WHEAT 13 SORGHUM 14 POTATOES 15 SWEET POTATO 16 YAMS 17 GROUNDNUT 18 CASHEW NUT 19 PEANUT 20 BEANS OF ALL KINDS 21 LENTILS 22 PEAS 23 PIGEON PEA 24 COWPEA 25 CHICKPEA 26 CARROTS 27 TOMATOES 28 CABBAGE 29 SPINACH 30 LETTUCE 31 PEPPERS 32 PUMPKIN 33 CUCUMBERS 34 ONIONS 35 MELON 36 ORANGES 37 LEMON 99 OTHER (SPECIFY) Which crops did you grow with other bunge members? SEE CODES [FIELD-CODED] How much money did youindividually receive for the [CROP] sold during the last 12 months from this plotin total? (KSh) How much money did you individuallyreceive for the [CROP] sold during the past one month from this plotin total? (KSh) CROP 1 |__|__|___________ CROP2 |__|__|___________ CROP3 |__|__|___________ CROP4 |__|__|___________ CROP5 |__|__|___________ Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 32 [COMPLETE IF SAID YES TO B2.2] ANIMAL TYPE B2.7 B2.8a B2.8b Over the past 12 months, have you raised [ANIMAL] with other members of the bunge? How much did you earn from raising [ANIMAL] with other bunge members in the past 12 monthsin total? How much did you earn from raising [ANIMAL] with other bunge members in the past one monthin total? a) Cattle 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL b) Sheep 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL c) Goats 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL d) Poultry 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL e) Pigs 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL f) Other (specify) 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 33 [COMPLETE IF SAID YES TO B2.3] B2.9 B2.10 B2.11 CODES FOR B2.9 10 FARMING/LIVESTOCK 11 FISHING 12 TRADING/SALES 13 JUA KALI 14 TRANSPORT 15 CONSTRUCTION 16 EDUCATION 17 HEALTH 18 CLERICAL 19 FACTORY WORKER 20 RESTAURANT/BAR/ HOTEL/HOSPITALITY 21 OTHER SERVICE INDUSTRY 22 ENTERTAINMENT 99 OTHER (SPECIFY) What kind of business activities did you do with other members of the bunge? SEE CODES [FIELD-CODED] How much money did you individually earn from this activity in the past 12 months in total? How much money did you individually earn from this activity in the past one month in total? A C T 1 |__|__| ___________ A C T 2 |__|__| ___________ A C T 3 |__|__| ___________ A C T 4 |__|__| ___________ A C T 5 |__|__| ___________ Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 34 Subsection B3: Wage/Salary Employment [ask if YES to B1.2] You mentioned that you worked for someone who is not a member of your household for wages or a salary in the past month/past 12 months. I would now like to ask you some questions about these activities that you did as an employee. B3.1 B3.2 B3.3 B3.4 B3.5 B3.6 B3.7 CODES FOR B3.1 10 FARMING/LIVESTOCK 11 FISHING 12 TRADING/SALES 13 JUA KALI 14 TRANSPORT 15 CONSTRUCTION 16 EDUCATION 17 HEALTH 18 CLERICAL 19 FACTORY WORKER 20 RESTAURANT/BAR/ HOTEL/HOSPITALITY 21 OTHER SERVICE INDUSTRY 22 ENTERTAINMENT 99 OTHER (SPECIFY) Business Activity ID SEE CODES How many months did you spend on this activity in the past 12 months? Did you do this activity in the past one month? How many days did you spend on this activity in the past one month? On average how much were you paid each day in the form of money? (KSh) Did you receive any bonuses or in￾kind payments for this work? How much money did you receive in the form of bonuses or in-kind payments in the past 12 monthsin total? (KSh) A C T 1 |__|__| _________ __ 1 YES 2 NO B3.5 1 YES 2 NO B3.8 A C T 2 |__|__| _________ __ 1 YES 2 NO B3.5 1 YES 2 NO B3.8 A C T 3 |__|__| _________ __ 1 YES 2 NO B3.5 1 YES 2 NO B3.8 A C T 4 |__|__| _________ __ 1 YES 2 NO B3.5 1 YES 2 NO B3.8 A C T 5 |__|__| _________ __ 1 YES 2 NO B3.5 1 YES 2 NO B3.8 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 35 For any of the business activities you mentioned, was the bunge helpful in the following ways? B3.8 Generating employment for yourself 1 YES 2 NO B3.9 Teaching you skills that were helpful with the business activity 1 YES 2 NO B3.10 Finding employment or information for this activity through another bunge member 1 YES 2 NO B3.11 The bunge helped in some other way [SPECIFY] 1 YES 2 NO Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 36 Subsection B4: Agriculture – [ask if YES to B1.3] You mentioned that you grew crops on a plot owned/rented by you/your household. I would like to ask you about these farming activities. Please tell me which crops you grew in the 12 months. If you have grown more than 5 crops, please tell me your 5 major crops (the ones on which you have spent the most time). B4.1 B4.2 B4.3 B4.4 B4.5 B4.6 B4.7 CODES FOR B4.1 10 MANAGU 11 MAIZE 12 WHEAT 13 SORGHUM 14 POTATOES 15 SWEET POTATO 16 YAMS 17 GROUNDNUT 18 CASHEW NUT 19 PEANUT 20 BEANS OF ALL KINDS 21 LENTILS 22 PEAS 23 PIGEON PEA 24 COWPEA 25 CHICKPEA 26 CARROTS 27 TOMATOES 28 CABBAGE 29 SPINACH 30 LETTUCE 31 PEPPERS 32 PUMPKIN 33 CUCUMBERS 34 ONIONS 35 MELON 36 ORANGES 37 LEMON 99 OTHER (SPECIFY) CODES FOR B4.5 00 NONE 11 KG 12 LITRES 13 BUSHELS 14 BAGS (10 KG) 15 BAGS (12.5 KG) 16 BAGS (20 KG) 17 BAGS (25 KG) 18 BAGS (50 KG) 19 TINS (1 LITRE) 20 TINS (2 LITRES) 21 TINS (5 LITRES) 22 BUNCH 23 CUP 24 CRATES 25 25 LITRE BUCKET 99 OTHER (SPECIFY) Crop ID SEE CODES In terms of the main decisions about growing and selling this crop, who is the main decision￾maker? How much of the earnings or produce from this [CROP] do you get to decide what to do with? During the last 12 months, what quantity of [CROP] did your household harvest? UNIT OF MEASURE FOR B4.4 SEE CODES How much money did your household get for the [CROP] sold during the past 12 months in total? (KSh) How much money did your household get for the [CROP] sold during the past one month in total? (KSh) C R O P 1 |__|__| __________ _ 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none |__|__| ______ C R O P 2 |__|__| __________ _ 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none |__|__| ______ C R O P 3 |__|__| __________ _ 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none |__|__| ______ C R O P 4 |__|__| __________ _ 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none |__|__| ______ C R O P 5 |__|__| __________ _ 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none |__|__| ______ Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 37 For growing any of the crops you mentioned, was the bunge helpful in the following ways? B4.8 Teaching you skills that were helpful with growing these crops 1 YES 2 NO B4.9 Giving you credit for inputs for these crops (credit comes from the bunge) 1 YES 2 NO B4.10 Giving you inputs for these crops (inputs comes directly from the bunge) 1 YES 2 NO B4.11 Provide labor for growing these crops 1 YES 2 NO B4.12 The bunge helped in some other way [SPECIFY] 1 YES 2 NO Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 38 Subsection B5: Livestock- [ask if YES to B1.4] You mentioned that you/your householdraised livestock in the past month/past 12 months. I would like to ask you about these livestock activities. Please tell me which livestock you raised in the past month/12 months. ANIMAL TYPE B5.1 B5.2 B5.3 B5.4 B5.5 B5.6 B5.7 B5.8 Over the past 12 months, has your household raised [ANIMAL]? How many [ANIMAL] were sold in the past 12 months? IF NONE, ENTER 0 AND GO TO B5.6 On average, how much money was received for each [ANIMAL]? Over the past one month, have you raised [ANIMAL]? How many [ANIMAL] were sold in the past one month? IF NONE, ENTER 0 How many [ANIMAL] are currently owned by your household? By “own”, I mean an animal that your household can sell without anyone else’s permission. How many [ANIMAL] were consumed by your household over the past 12 months? IF NONE, ENTIER 0 AND GO TO NEXT ANIMAL How many [ANIMAL] were consumed by your household over the past one month? a) Cattle 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL 1 YES 2 NOB5.6 b) Sheep 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL 1 YES 2 NOB5.6 c) Goats 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL 1 YES 2 NOB5.6 d) Poultry 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL 1 YES 2 NOB5.6 e) Pigs 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL 1 YES 2 NOB5.6 f) Other (specify) 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL 1 YES 2 NOB5.6 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 39 ANIMAL TYPE B5.9 B5.10 B5.11 B5.12 B5.13 B5.14 During the past 12 months, did you sell any animal by￾products that were made from [ANIMAL] – such as milk, eggs, or skins? What is the total amount of money received from animal by￾products sold in the past 12 months? (KSh) During the past one month, did you sell any animal by￾products that were made from [ANIMAL] – such as milk, eggs, or skins? What is the total amount of money received from animal by￾products sold in the past one month? (KSh) In terms of the main decisions about raising and selling [ANIMAL], and selling by products, who is the main decision maker concerning your work on this activity? How much of the earnings or produce from this activity do you get to decide what to do with? a) Cattle 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none b) Sheep 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none c) Goats 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none d) Poultry 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none e) Pigs 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none f) Other (specify) 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 40 For any of the livestock activities you mentioned, was the bunge helpful in the following ways? B5.15 Teaching you skills that were helpful for this livestock activity 1 YES 2 NO B5.16 Giving you credit for stock for this livestock activity 1 YES 2 NO B5.17 The bunge helped in some other way [SPECIFY] 1 YES 2 NO Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 41 Subsection B6: Business activities- [ask if YES to B1.5] You mentioned earlier that you conducted business activities yourself or with your household in the past month/12 months. I would now like to ask about these business activities. First please tell me which type of business activities you conducted. B6.1 B6.2 B6.3 B6.4 B6.5 B6.6 B6.7 B6.8 B6.9 B6.10 CODES FOR B6.1 10 FARMING/LIVESTOCK 11 FISHING 12 TRADING/SALES 13 JUA KALI 14 TRANSPORT 15 CONSTRUCTION 16 EDUCATION 17 HEALTH 18 CLERICAL 19 FACTORY WORKER 20 RESTAURANT/BAR/ HOTEL/HOSPITALITY 21 OTHER SERVICE INDUSTRY 22 ENTERTAINMENT 99 OTHER (SPECIFY) Business Activity ID SEE CODES In the past 12 months, how many months did you work on this business/did you operate this business? Did you do this activity in the past one month? In the past month, how much did you earn from this business? In a good month, how much do you earn from this business? In a bad month, how much do you earn from this business? In the past 12 months , how many months have been good? In the past 12 months, how many months have been bad? In terms of the main decisions about this business, who is the main decision-maker concerning your work on this activity? How much of the earnings or produce from this activity do you get to decide what to do with? A C T 1 |__|__| ___________ 1 YES 2 NO B6.5 1 MYSELF 2SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none A C T 2 |__|__| ___________ 1 YES 2 NO B6.5 1 MYSELF 2SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none A C T 3 |__|__| ___________ 1 YES 2 NO B6.5 1 MYSELF 2SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none A C T 4 |__|__| ___________ 1 YES 2 NO B6.5 1 MYSELF 2SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none A C T 5 |__|__| ___________ 1 YES 2 NO B6.5 1 MYSELF 2SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 42 For any of the business activities you mentioned, was the bunge helpful in the following ways? B6.11 Teaching you skills that were helpful for this business activity 1 YES 2 NO B6.12 Giving you credit for stock for this business activity 1 YES 2 NO B6.13 The bunge helped in some other way [SPECIFY] 1 YES 2 NO Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 43 Subsection B7: Other income (ask all respondents) I want to ask you about some other ways people get money that we haven't talked about yet. Have you received money from any of the following (if yes, prompt for how much) a) Over the past 12 months? 1 YES 2 NO  NEXT aa) How much did you receive over the past 12 months? b) Over the past one month? 1 YES 2 NO NEXT bb) How much did you receive over the past one month? B7.1 Income from the sale of durable goods, such as cars, radios, bicycles, etc. B7.2 Income from sale or rental of land B7.3 Remittances(money sent to you from someone outside of your household) B7.4 Pension B7.5 Grants or other funds from the government B7.6 Medical insurance or life insurance B7.7 Interest on savings, credit society, or other bank accounts B7.8 Lottery winnings, gambling or games of chance B7.9 Community merry-go round, table banking B7.10 Harambe (fundraising amongst friends and relatives) B7.11 Inheritance B7.12 Other (specify) Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 44 SECTION C: POLITICAL EMPOWERMENT AND INCLUSION Now I would like to ask about your opinion on politics and some current issues. C1 Here is a list of actions that people sometimes take as citizens. For each of these, please tell me whether you, personally, have done any of these things during the past year. If not, would you do this if you had the chance? (If yes: Yes, often; Yes, several times; Yes, once or twice) (If no: No, but would do it if had the chance; No, would never do this) 0 No, would never do this 1 No, but would do it if had the chance 2 Yes, once or twice 3 Yes, several times 4 Yes, often C1.1 Discussed politics with friends or neighbors C1.2 Attended a community meeting C1.3 Got together with others to raise an issue C1.4 Attended a demonstration or protest march C1.5 Used force or violence for a political cause C2 Do you agree or disagree with the following statements? 1 strongly agree 2 agree 3 disagree 4 strongly disagree C2.1 Politics and government sometimes seem so complicated that you can’t really understand what’s going on. C2.2 As far as politics are concerned, friends and neighbors do not take my opinion seriously C2.3 If you had to, you would be able to join with others to make elected representatives listen Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 45 C3 During the past year, how often have you contacted any of the following persons for help to solve a problem or to give them your views? 1 often 2 a few times 3 only once 4 never C3.1 A Local Government councilor C3.2 A District Commissioner C3.3 A Member of Parliament C3.4 An official of a government ministry C3.5 A political party official C3.6 A religious leader C3.7 Local elders C3.8 Community-Owned Resource Person C3.9 Retirees C3.10 Opinion leaders C3.11 Some other influential person (prompt if necessary: You know, someone with more money or power than you who can speak on your behalf.) C4 When there are problems with how local government is run in your community, how much can an ordinary person do to improve the situation? 1 a lot 2 a little 3 nothing C5 How easy or difficult is it for an ordinary person to have his voice heard when elections are not happening? 1 very easy 2 somewhat easy 3 somewhat difficult 4 very difficult C6 Do you believe [ENTITY] are taking into account your interests and the interests of other young people in Kenya when making decisions? 1 yes, a lot 2 yes, somewhat 3 yes, a little 4 not at all C6.1 Any of the political parties C6.2 Parliament C6.3 Local councilors C6.4 District-level government Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 46 C7 For people like you, do you think things in Kenya will get better or worse in the years to come? 1 a lot better 2 a little better 3 same 4 a little worse 5 a lot worse C8 With regard to the most recent national elections, which statement is true for you? 1 You voted in the elections 2 You decided not to vote 3 You could not find the polling station 4 You were prevented from voting 5 You did not have time to vote 6 You were not registered 7 You were too young to vote 8 Did not vote for some other reason C9 Are you planning to vote in the next election? 1 YES 2 NO 3 MAYBE/NOT SURE Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 47 SECTION D: TRUST AND SOCIAL CAPITAL Now I would like to ask you some questions about the community in which you live. These questions are designed to help us understand how you and your friends and neighbors interact with one another and work together. D1. Are you a member of [GROUP]? 1 YES 2 NONEXT GROUP D2. If so, have you ever taken a leadership role in the organization? 1 YES 2 NO a A drama, music, or dance club? b A farmers group or cooperative? c A religious group (church/mosque, prayer or bible study group)? d A self-help group? e A school committee or school club? f A sports team? g An NGO (as a volunteer)? h A group that mobilizes the community for meetings? i A special interest group (physically disabled,community in arid areas) j A pressure group (e.g. political activitism groups) k Other (SPECIFY: ________________________________________) D3 Suppose something unfortunate happened to someone in the village, such as a serious illness. How likely is it that some people in the village would get together to help them? 1 very likely 2 somewhat likely 3 somewhat unlikely 4 completely unlikely D4 If you suddenly needed to borrow a small amount of money, enough to pay for expenses for your household for one week: 1 YES 2 NO D4.1 Are there people beyond your immediate family and close relatives who would be willing to help you? D4.2 Are there people outside of your ethnic group who would help you? D5 In general, do you agree or disagree with this statement: Most people who live in this village can be trusted 1 strongly agree 2 somewhat agree 3 somewhat disagree 4 strongly disagree Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 48 D6 If there were a problem that affected the entire village/neighborhood, for instance (RURAL: crop failure, URBAN: flood/fire), who do you think would work together to deal with the situation? 1 Each person/household would deal with the problem individually 2 People would work with others of the same ethnic group only 3 The whole community would work together Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 49 SECTION E. ATTITUDES/BEHAVIORS TOWARDS ETHNICITY AND VIOLENCE E1 We have spoken to many people in Kenya and they have all described themselves in different ways. Some people describe themselves in terms of their language, religion, race, and others describe themselves in economic terms, such as working class, middle class, or a farmer. Besides being Kenyan which specific group do you feel you belong to first and foremost? E2 Let’s go back to talking about you. What is your ethnicity? [Do NOT read options. Code from response] 01 KIKUYU 02 LUO 03 LUHYA 04 KAMBA 05 MERU 06 KISII 07 KALENJIN 08 MASAI 09 MIJIKENDA 10 TAITA 11 SOMALI 12 POKOT 13 TURKANA 14 BAJUNI 15 KURIA 16 TESO 17 RENDILLE 18 EMBU 19 BORANA 20 SAMBURU 21 ARAB 22 SWAHILI 23 INDIAN 24 KENYAN ONLY (DOESN’T THINK OF SELF IN THOSE TERMS) SKIP TO E5 99 OTHER(SPECIFY: ___________) E3 Let us suppose that you had to choose between being a Kenyan and being a ________[ETHNIC GROUP]. Which of the following statements best expresses your feelings? 1 I feel only Kenyan 2 I feel more Kenyan than [INSERT ETHNIC GROUP] 3 I feel equally Kenyan and [INSERT ETHNIC GROUP] 4 I feel more [INSERT ETHNIC GROUP] than Kenyan 5 I feel only [INSERT ETHNIC GROUP] E4 In general, do you think [INSERT ETHNIC GROUP] are more trustworthy, less trustworthy, or about the same, compared to other Kenyans? 1 much more trustworthy 2 somewhat more trustworthy 3 about the same 4 somewhat less trustworthy 5 much less trustworthy Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 50 Now I would like to ask you some questions about your feelings towards conflicts and violence. E5 In your experience, how often do violent conflicts arise between people: 0 no 1 rarely 2 sometimes 3 often E5.1 Within your own family? E5.2 Within the community where you live? E6 To whom would you turn for help to resolve a violent conflict between different groups in this country? 01 NO ONE 02 THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THE CONFLICT 03 FAMILY/FRIENDS/NEIGHBORS 04 TRADITIONAL CHIEFS/ELDERS/MEDIATORS 05 TRADITIONAL COURTS 06 LOCAL COURTS 07 LOCAL ADMINISTRATION 08 A RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION OR LEADER 09 A NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION (INCLUDING COMMUNITY-BASED) 10 A GANG 11 THE ARMED FORCES/ POLICE 12 OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES 13 NATIONAL COURTS 14 CONFLICTS CANNOT BE RESOLVED E7 During the upcoming election campaign, how much do you personally fear becoming a victim of political intimidation or violence? 1 a lot 2 somewhat 3 a little bit 4 not at all E8 After the elections in 2007, many people were angry and some became violent. Do you think some of the people who were violent were justified in what they did? 1 yes completely 2 yes somewhat 3 no E9 Sometimes people in politics will try to recruit people or pay them to cause trouble after an election, like they did after the election in 2007. Is this something you might consider doing if someone approached you? 1 Yes, I would consider it 2 I might consider it 3 I probably would not consider it 4 I definitely would not consider it Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 51 Now I would like to ask your opinions about relations between people. In particular, I would like to ask you how you think people should react in certain situations. E10 If a person insulted his/her neighbor, how should the neighbor react? 1 Fight it out physically/ beat him or her up 2 Abuse him/her verbally 3 Report to the local authorities (Chief/Police) 4 Seek resolution from others (neighbours /relatives/religious leaders) 5 Discuss with the other person 6 Do nothing E11 If a person was caught stealing from one of your neighbors, what should your neighbor do? 1 Fight it out physically/ beat him or her up 2 Abuse him/her verbally 3 Report to the local authorities (Chief/Police) 4 Seek resolution from others (neighbours /relatives/religious leaders) 5 Discuss with the other person 6 Do nothing E12 If a man’s wife were to burn his supper, how should the man react? 1 Fight it out physically/beat him or her up 2 Abuse him/her verbally 3 Report to the local authorities (Chief/Police) 4 Seek resolution from others (neighbours /relatives/religious leaders) 5 Discuss with her 6 Do nothing E13 If a man’s wife were to argue with him or talk back, how should the person react? 1 Fight it out physically/beat him or her up 2 Abuse him/her verbally 3 Report to the local authorities (Chief/Police) 4 Seek resolution from others (neighbours /relatives/religious leaders) 5 Discuss with her 6 Do nothing E14 In the last 6 months, how many times have you been in a physical fight with another person? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 52 SECTION F. SELF-EFFICACY AND RELATING TO OTHERS Now I’d like to ask you about how you have felt in the past year. For each of the following statements, please tell me how true you think it is for you: 1 not at all true 2 hardly true 3 moderately true 4 exactly true F1 I can always manage to solve my problems if I try hard enough F2 If someone opposes me, I can find the means and ways to get what I want F3 I am certain I can accomplish my goals F4 I am confident that I could deal effectively with unexpected events F5 Thanks to my resourcefulness, I can handle unforeseen situations F6 I can solve most problems if I invest the necessary effort F7 I can remain calm when facing difficulties because I can rely on my coping abilities F8 When I am confronted with a problem, I can find several solutions F9 If I am in trouble, I can think of a good solution F10 I can handle whatever comes my way Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 53 For each of the following question, please tell me whether you often, sometimes, rarely or never feel or act this way. 1 often 2 sometimes 3 rarely 4 never F11 Do you play games, sports, or go dancing with your friends? F12 Do you destroy things that belong to others? F13 Do you enjoy doing things and talking with peers? F14 Are you helpful to elders? F15 Do you feel sympathy for others? F16 Are you quarrelsome? F17 Do you lie or behave in a dishonest way? F18 Do you take things from other places without permission? F19 Do you disobey your parents/guardians, teachers or elders? F20 Do you enjoy participating in activities in the community? F21 Do you have love for your peers? F22 Do you share with others? F23 Do you curse or use abusive language? F24 Do you help younger ones? F25 Do you threaten to hurt others? F26 Do you share your feelings or ideas with your friends? F27 Do you have confidence to be responsible for others? F28 Do other youth like associating with you? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 54 SECTION G.RESPONDENT DEMOGRAPHICS Now I would like to ask you a few more questions about yourself. G1 How old did you turn at your last birthday? G2 What is the highest level of education you have completed? [Code from answer. Do not read options] 00 NO FORMAL SCHOOLING 01 INFORMAL SCHOOLING ONLY (INCLUDING KORANIC SCHOOLING) 02 SOME PRIMARY SCHOOLING 03 PRIMARY SCHOOL COMPLETED 04 SOME SECONDARY SCHOOL / HIGH SCHOOL 05 SECONDARY SCHOOL / HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETED 06 POST-SECONDARY QUALIFICATIONS, OTHER THAN UNIVERSITY E.G. A DIPLOMA OR DEGREE FROM A TECHNICAL INSTITUTE OR COLLEGE 07 SOME UNIVERSITY 08 UNIVERSITY COMPLETED 09 POST-GRADUATE G3 What is your religion, if any? 00 NO RELIGION 01 CHRISTIAN 02 MUSLIM 99 OTHER (SPECIFY) G4 Which best describes your living situation? 01 I LIVE IN MY PARENTS HOUSE 02 I LIVE IN THE HOUSE OF OTHER RELATIVES 03 I RENT A ROOM IN SOMEONE ELSE’S HOUSE 04 I RENT A HOUSE 05 I LIVE IN MY OWN HOUSE G5 Are you married? 01 YES 02 NO G6 Who would you say in the main income earner in your household? 01 MYSELF 02 MY SPOUSE 03 A PARENT 04 ANOTHER RELATIVE 05 OTHER G7 Have you always lived in this village? 01 YES  SECTION H 02 NO G8 How many years have you lived in this village? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 55 SECTION H.HOUSEHOLD ASSETS H1 Which of these things do you or your household own? 1 YES, OWN 2 NO, DON’T OWN  NEXT ITEM H.1 Radio H.2 Television H.3 Bicycle H.4 Motorcycle H.5 Car H.6 Cell phone H.7 Clock/watch H.8 Tape or CD Player H.9 Gas/charcoal stove H.10 Sewing machine H.11 Refrigerator H.12 Table H.13 Chairs H.14 Cupboard H.15 Mattress H.16 Generator Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 56 H19 Where is your main source of water for household use located? 01 INSIDE THE HOUSE 02 INSIDE THE COMPOUND 03 OUTSIDE THE COMPOUND H20 What is your dwelling’s flooring material? 01 EARTH/SAND/MUD 02 WOOD 03 CONCRETE/CEMENT 04 CERAMIC TILE 99 OTHER H21 What is your dwelling’s wall material? 01 CARDBOARD 02 MUD/MUD BRICKS 03 METAL SHEETS 04 CONCRETE 05 STONE H22 What is your dwelling’s roofing material? 01 GRASS/THATCH 02 METAL/IRON SHEETS 03 CONCRETE/CEMENT 04 TILES (CLAY TILES) 05 PLASTIC SHEET/TARP This is end of our interview. Thank you very much for spending the time to answer these questions with me today. I1.11 INTERVIEW END TIME (USE 24-HOUR FORMAT) |__|__|:|__|__| Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline Questionnaire - Member | Page 57 SECTION J. INTERVIEWER OBSERVATIONS ENUMERATOR: COMPLETE THIS SECTION AFTER SECTION L HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND YOU HAVE LEFT THE RESPONDENT’S HOME. J1 RESPONDENT'S GENDER 01 MALE 02 FEMALE J2 RESPONDENT’S RACE 01 BLACK / AFRICAN 02 SOUTH ASIAN (INDIAN, PAKISTANI, ETC.) 03 WHITE / EUROPEAN 04 EAST ASIAN (CHINESE, KOREAN, INDONESIAN, ETC.) 05 COLOURED / MIXED RACE 06 ARAB / LEBANESE / NORTH AFRICAN 99 OTHER J3 WHAT WAS THE PRIMARY LANGUAGE USED IN THE INTERVIEW? 01 ENGLISH 02 KISWAHILI 03 KIKUYU 04 LUO 05 LUHYA 06 KAMBA 07 KALENJIN 08 SOMALI 99 OTHER [SPECIFY]: _______________________ J4 WERE THERE ANY OTHER PEOPLE IMMEDIATELY PRESENT WHO MIGHT BE LISTENING DURING THE INTERVIEW? 00 NO ONE 01 SPOUSE ONLY 02 CHILDREN ONLY 03 A FEW OTHERS 04 SMALL CROWD J5 DID THE RESPONDENT CHECK WITH OTHERS FOR INFORMATION TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION? 1 YES 2 NO J6 DO YOU THINK ANYONE INFLUENCED THE RESPONDENT’S ANSWERS DURING THE INTERVIEW? 1 YES 2 NO Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Leader | Page 58 C. ENDLINE QUESTIONNAIRE – LEADER Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Leader | Page 59 Bunge-Leader Questionnaire Bunge code: |__|__|__| Name of Bunge ________________ Village _______________________ Sub-location ___________________ Respondent Unique ID: _____ CHOOSE LANGUAGE – 1 ENGLISH, 2 SWAHILI INTRODUCTION AND CONSENT Hello and thank you for talking to us again. As you might remember from our first interview in summer 2012, we are from TNS, a survey research firm in Kenya. We are visiting here today to conduct a follow-up survey to continue to better understand the lives of young people in Kenya and the status of bunges as part of the Yes Youth Can program. This information is important to know as it will give us information on the role of youths in Kenyan society. The interview will take about 15-20 minutes and we will ask questions to you about particular topics related to characteristics and activities of your bunge. Your participation is completely voluntary. You are free to not answer any question with which you are not comfortable, and you may stop the interview at any time, in which case we will only use the data up to the point you withdrew from the interview. Your responses will be aggregated with other participants' responses and your name will not appear on any of our reports. The information that you provide will be kept until at least summer of 2014 for the purposes of preparing reports to the project sponsor. If you have any questions about the survey, you may contact XXX at TNS at XXX-XXX-XXX. If you have questions about your rights as a survey participant, you may contact IRB@norc.org. May we start now? AA.1 Has the bunge held any meetings in the past three months? 1 YES  AA.3 2 NO P1 :Administer consent form? (choose no if you are entering respondent information for an unsuccessful interview) 1 YES 2 NO  Q12 Response to consent (1YES 2 NO Q12) |__| Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Leader | Page 60 AA.2 Is the bunge planning to meet again anytime in the future? 1 YES 2 NO  Q1 AA.3 Has your bunge merged with another bunge within the last two years? 1 YES 2 NO AA.4 Is the name of your bunge still [READ NAME FROM SAMPLE]? 1 YES  AA.6 2 NO AA.5 What is the new name of the bunge? [open-ended]_________________ AA.6 When was the current chairperson first elected? MONTH: __ YEAR: __ A1 Which activities does the bunge currently participate in? [select all that apply] AGRICULTURE 01 CROP FARMING (TEA, COFFEE, BANANA, SUGARCANE, GROUNDNUTS, ALOE VERA, VEGETABLES, MUSHROOMS, FLOWERS, RICE, NAPIER GRASS, ETC) 02 TREE NURSERIES/GREENHOUSES 03 AGRO-FORESTRY/PLANTING TREES 04 AQUACULTURE/FISHPONDS/FISHING 05 IRRIGATION SCHEME 06 ORGANIC FARMING 07 PROVIDING LABOR/WORKERS FOR HIRE 08 PROVIDING OR ACQUIRING FARMING EQUIPMENT 09 OTHER AGRICULTURE AGRIBUSINESS/FOOD-RELATED ACTIVITY 10 CROP SALES (VEGETABLES, FRUITS, OTHER CROPS) 11 SEEDLING SALES 12 FISH SALES/FISH STORAGE 13 ANIMAL BYPRODUCTS SALES (EGGS, MILK, ETC) 14 FOOD PROCESSING (TOMATO PASTE, MAIZE FLOUR, MAIZE GRINDER, FRUIT JUICES, PALM PRODUCTS) 15 OTHER FOOD-RELATED ACTIVITY (E.G. BAKED GOODS) 16 OTHER AGRIBUSINESS ACTIVITY (E.G. CHICKEN FEED PROCESSING) ANIMAL HUSBANDRY 17 LIVESTOCK RAISING (COWS, PIGS, SHEEP, GOATS, POULTRY, RABBITS, ETC) 18 LIVESTOCK SALES (COWS, PIGS, SHEEP, GOATS, POULTRY, RABBITS, ETC) 19 ANIMAL BYPRODUCTS PRODUCTION (EGGS, MILK, ETC) A3.1 Of the activities you told me that the bunge participates in, which would you say is the most important focus of the bunge? [select 1] A3.2 Which one is the second most important focus? [select 1] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Leader | Page 61 A3.3 Which one is the third most important focus? [select 1] 20 MANURE PRODUCTION/MANURE TRANSFORMATION 21 BEEKEEPING/HONEY PRODUCTION AND SALES 22 OTHER ANIMAL-RELATED ACTIVITIES (CATTLE DIP PREPARATION, ZERO GRAZING IN SMALL SCALE FARMS, POULTRY INCUBATORS ETC) TRADE/BUSINESS/SERVICES 23 MECHANIC/VEHICLES/TRANSPORT (REPAIR, SALES, BATTERING CHARGING, FUEL SALES, CAR WASH, ETC) 24 TABLE BANKING OR MERRY GO ROUND 25 FORMAL ACCESS TO CREDIT 26 INFORMAL INSURANCE 27 ACCESS TO FORMAL INSURANCE 28 COMMUNITY SUPPORT ACTIVITIES/SOCIAL WORK (VOLUNTARISM, FUNERAL ASSISTANCE, ADVOCACY, ETC) 29 ENTERTAINMENT/TOURISM (ART PERFORMANCES, ECO-TOURISM, MUSEUMS, ETC) 30 COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES (CYBER CAFÉ, RUNNING ICT CENTER, PHOTOCOPY, ETC) 31 HOSPITALITY (CATERING, RESTAURANT, ETC) 32 RETAIL/RETAIL SHOPS (BARBERSHOP, CLOTHES SALES, SHOE REPAIR, ETC) 33 MANUFACTURING (SOAP MAKING, BASKETRY, JEWELRY, EMBROIDERING, ETC) 34 CONSTRUCTION (WELL DIGGING, BUILDING TOILETS, BRICK MAKING, TIMBER HARVESTING, ETC) 35 RECYCLING (GARBAGE RECYCLING, CHARCOAL RECYCLING, ETC) 36 OTHER BUSINESS, TRADE, SERVICE ACTIVITIES (GARBAGE COLLECTION, CHILD CARE, LAUNDRY, ETC) COMMUNITY AWARENESS/TRAINING/COMMUNITY SERVICE 37 SOCIAL ACTIVITIES (PEACE BUILDING ACTIVITIES, YOUTH MOBILIZATION) 38 TRAININGS (HIV/AIDS AWARENESS, GIRLS EARLY MARRIAGE AWARENESS, FGM, FARMER TRAINING, ETC) 39 EDUCATION-RELATED ACTIVITIES (OPERATING A SCHOOL, ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION, RELIGIOUS EDUCATION) 40 OTHER 1 41 OTHER 2 A4 When was the bunge formed? (mm/yyyy) Which of the following are true about the bunge: A5.1 The bunge is registered 1 YES 2 No but we have applied  A6.1 3 No have not applied yet A6.1 A5.2 When was the bunge registered? (mm/yyyy) A6.1 The bunge has a workplan 1 YES 2 NO A7.1 A6.2 When was the workplan created? (mm/yyyy) A7.1 The bunge has a bank account 1 YES 2 NO A8.1 A7.2 When was the bank account opened? (mm/yyyy) A11 Someone from the bunge has attended a county forum 1 YES 2 NO A12 Someone from the bunge has been elected to the county 1 YES Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Leader | Page 62 bunge 2 NO A12.2 Has any member of the bunge run for political office since the bunge was formed? 1 YES 2 NO  A13 A12.3 What political office has/have the member(s) run for? (check all that apply) 1 PRESIDENTIAL 2 SENATORIAL 3 COUNTY GOVERNOR 4 WOMEN REPRESENTATIVE 5 MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT 6 MEMBER OF COUNTY ASSEMBLY A13 The bunge has received trainings 1 YES 2 NO A14 A13.1a Training 1: Type/Topic [open-ended] A13.1b Training 1: Number of days [numeric] A13.2a Training 2: Type/Topic [open-ended] A13.2b Training 2: Number of days [numeric] A13.3a Training 3: Type/Topic [open-ended] A13.3b Training 3: Number of days [numeric] A13.4a Training 4: Type/Topic [open-ended] A13.4b Training 4: Number of days [numeric] A13.5a Training 5: Type/Topic [open-ended] A13.5b Training 5: Number of days [numeric] A14 How often does the bunge meet? 01 weekly or more often 02 every two weeks 03 every month 04 every other month or so 05 less than once every other month Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Leader | Page 63 A18 How many members total are currently in the bunge? A19 What ethnicities are represented in your bunge? [ALL THAT APPLY] 01 KIKUYU 02 LUO 03 LUHYA 04 KAMBA 05 MERU 06 KISII 07 KALENJIN 08 MASAI 09 MIJIKENDA 10 TAITA 11 SOMALI 12 POKOT 13 TURKANA 14 BAJUNI 15 KURIA 16 TESO 17 RENDILLE 18 EMBU 19 BORANA 20 SAMBURU 21 ARAB 22 SWAHILI 23 INDIAN 24 KENYAN ONLY (DOESN’T THINK OF SELF IN THOSE TERMS) 99 OTHER(SPECIFY: ___________) A20 What percentage of the members attend more than half of the meetings? A21 Since the bunge formed, have any members dropped out? (i.e. members who have stopped participating in any bunge activities and you don’t expect them to participate in the future) 1 YES 2 NO  A22 A21.a How many members have dropped out since the bunge formed? Please give your best estimate. A22 About what percentage of the youths in this community are part of the bunge? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Leader | Page 64 A23 a) Does your bunge raise funds from [SOURCE]? b) How much did the bunge raise from [SOURCE] in the past 12 months? A23.a Member dues/Subscriptions 1 YES 2 NO A23.b Economic activities 1 YES 2 NO A23.c Donors 1 YES 2 NO Bunges can apply for funding from different the Tahidi Youth fund grant or from other outside sources. Please tell me whether the bunge applied for funding from these sources, whether the bunge received funding, and if so how much and what the funding was used for. A24 a) Has the bunge applied for funding from [SOURCE] b) Did the bunge receive funding from [SOURCE] c) How much money did the bunge receive from [SOURCE] in total? d) What was the purpose of the funding? A24.1 The Tahidi Youth fund grant? 1 YES 2 NO  24.3 1 YES 2 NO  24.3 [in KSh] 1. AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITY 2. NON-AGRICULTURAL INCOME GENERATING ACTIVITY 3. COMMUNITY SERVICE PROJECT 4. SOCIAL/CULTURAL ACTIVITY 5. OTHER (SPECIFY) A24.3 Any other source (Specify) 1 YES 2 NO  25.1 1 YES 2 NO  25.1 [in KSh] 1. AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITY 2. NON-AGRICULTURAL INCOME GENERATING ACTIVITY 3. COMMUNITY SERVICE PROJECT 4. SOCIAL/CULTURAL ACTIVITY 5. OTHER (SPECIFY) A25.1 Are any members of the bunge part of a SACCO? 1 YES 2 NO  A26.1 A25.2 How many members of the bunge have joined the SACCO? A26.1 Did the bunge participate in the "My ID, My Life" Program? 1 YES 2 NO  A27 A26.2 How many people did the bunge help with obtaining an ID card? A27 Was any bunge member involved in the "Early warning, early response" program during the presidential elections this year? 1 YES 2 NO Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Leader | Page 65 A28 How often does the mobilizer talk to you about YYC activities? 1 weekly 2 once every two weeks 3 monthly 4 less than monthly 5 never A29 Are there organizations that provide funding, training, organize events, or facilitate employment opportunities etc that work with the youth in this area? 1 YES 2 NO  Q1 A30 What kind of organizations are they? (multiple responses possible) 1 NGOs 2 Government offices or ministries 3 religious organizations -7 Don’t know Q1 -8 Refused  Q1 A31 Which Non Government Organizations (NGOs) work with the youth in this area? A30b. In general, what activities do these organizations do with the youth in this area? (respondents can choose more than one) [open ended, list up to 6] 01 Provide funding 02 Business skills training 03 Health awareness training 04 Leadership training 05 Networking opportunities with other NGOs 06 Organize events 07 Provide material inputs 08 Assist in finding employment opportunities 09 Scholarships A32 Which Government offices or ministries work with the youth in this area? A31b. In general, what activities do these organizations do with the youth in this area? (respondents can choose more than one) [open ended, list up to 6] 01 Provide funding 02 Business skills training 03 Health awareness training 04 Leadership training 05 Networking opportunities with other NGOs 06 Organize events 07 Provide material inputs 08 Assist in finding employment opportunities 09 Scholarships Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Leader | Page 66 A33 Which Religious Organizations work with the youth in this area? A32b. In general, what activities do these organizations do with the youth in this area? (respondents can choose more than one) [open ended, list up to 6] 01 Provide funding 02 Business skills training 03 Health awareness training 04 Leadership training 05 Networking opportunities with other NGOs 06 Organize events 07 Provide material inputs 08 Assist in finding employment opportunities 09 Scholarships END OF INTERVIEW Q1: Respondent Name: _________ Q2: Respondent Position: [multiple choice] 1 Chairperson 2 Secretary 3 Treasurer 4 Other (Specify) Q3:Respondent Address: ____ Q4:Postal Code: ______ Q5:Respondent Telephone Number: _________ Q6: Is this the same respondent from the baseline survey? 1 Yes 2 No Q7: Interviewer Name: _____ Q8: Interviewer Number: _____ Q9: GPS Location: ____ Q10: Physical Location: _____ Q12 : How many attempts did it take to complete this interview? (Include the final successful attempt) Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Leader | Page 67 Date Time Disposition Code Comments Q13 : Result of attempt #1 __/__/__ __;__ __ Q14 : Result of attempt #2 __/__/__ __;__ __ Q15 : Result of attempt #3 __/__/__ __;__ __ Q16 : Result of attempt #4 __/__/__ __;__ __ Q17 : Result of attempt #5 __/__/__ __;__ __ # Disposition Codes: 1 No one at home 2 Impossible to contact; No contact number and other members could not trace respondent 3 Impossible to contact; number given not reachable/not going through 4 Impossible to contact the family/child answered the call,etc 5 Member of the family asks to postpone the interview until another time 6 Family member refused 7 Respondent did not turn up for interview 8 Respondent is not able to participate in the interview (illness,drunk,etc) 9 Respondent is not at home 10 Respondent is away from the home for extended time for a business trip,vacation,etc. 11 Respondent doesn’t have time and asks to postpone the interview until a more appropriate time 12 Direct refusal 13 Incomplete interview (specify why) 14 Respondent couldn’t speak any language in common with the interviewer 15 Other(specify why) 16 Successful attempt Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 68 D. ENDLINE QUESTIONNAIRE – MEMBER Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 69 KENYA YES YOUTH CAN SURVEY – YOUTH QUESTIONNAIRE (Endline Questionnaire) INTERVIEW Enumerator No. |__|__|__| Date (DD/MM/YYYY) |__|__|/|__|__|/|__|__|__|__| Data Clerk No. 1 |__|__|__| Date (DD/MM/YYYY) |__|__|/|__|__|/|__|__|__|__| Editor No.|__|__|__| Date (DD/MM/YYYY) |__|__|/|__|__|/|__|__|__|__| Data Clerk No. 2 |__|__|__| Date (DD/MM/YYYY) |__|__|/|__|__|/|__|__|__|__| Supervisor No.|__|__|__| Date (DD/MM/YYYY) |__|__|/|__|__|/|__|__|__|__| Validated? □ (check after validation) PROVINCE/REGION: CODE |__|__|__|NAME: _____________________________________________________________________________ SUBLOCATION: CODE |__|__|__| NAME: _____________________________________________________________________________ VILLAGE/TOWN: CODE |__|__|__| NAME: _____________________________________________________________________________ Treatment or Control ? 1 Treatment 2 Control  RESPONDENT # BUNGE: CODE |__|__|__| NAME: _____________________________________________________________________________ RESPONDENT #: CODE |__|__|__|__|__| GIS LOCATION OF RESPONDENT LATITUDE (N/S) |__| – DEGREES:|__|__| MINUTES: |__|__| . |__|__|__| LONGITUDE (E/W) |__| – DEGREES: |__|__|__|MINUTES: |__|__| .|__|__|__| INTERVIEWER/SUPERVISOR COMMENTS: Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 70 CHOOSE LANGUAGE – 1 ENGLISH, 2 SWAHILI INTRODUCTION AND CONSENT Hello and thank you for talking to us again. As you might remember from our first interview in summer 2012, we are from TNS, a survey research firm in Kenya. We are visiting here today to conduct a follow-up survey to continue to better understand the lives of young people such as yourself. This information is important to know as it will give us information on the role of youths in Kenyan society. The interview will take about 30 to 45 minutes and we will ask questions to you about particular topics related to being a youth or young adult in Kenya. Your participation is completely voluntary. You are free to not answer any question with which you are not comfortable, and you may stop the interview at any time, in which case we will only use the data up to the point you withdrew from the interview. Your responses will be aggregated with other participants' responses and your name will not appear on any of our reports. The information that you provide will be kept until at least summer of 2014 for the purposes of preparing reports to the project sponsor. If you have any questions about the survey, you may contact Simon Kimani at TNS at 020 483 0000. If you have questions about your rights as a survey participant, you can email IRB@norc.org. May we start now? AA1. INTERVIEW DATE AND START TIME |__|__|:|__|__| AA2. a. What is your first name? b. What is your surname? _____________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ P1 :Administer consent form? (choose no if you are entering respondent information for an unsuccessful interview) 1 YES 2 NO  Q12 Response to consent (1YES 2NO Q12) |__| Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 71 SECTION A: BUNGE INFORMATION [THIS SECTION ONLY APPLIES TO TREATMENT AREA RESPONDENTS] Now, I would like to ask you some questions about the bunge/youth village group/nisisi! Chapter AA.1 In the summer of 2012, you indicated that you were a member of [NAME OF BUNGE] Does this bunge still exist? 1 YES  AA.2 2 YES BUT IT HAS MERGED WITH ANOTHER BUNGE 3 NO  AA.4 AA.1.a What is the name of the merged bunge? [open-ended] AA.2 Do you still attend this bunge's meetings? 1 YES  A3 2 NO AA.3 Which of the following most accurately describes the reason that you don't attend meetings? 1 the bunge doesn't hold regular meetings 2 the bunge holds regular meetings but I have left the bunge  A1 3 the bunge holds regular meetings and I am still a member but I haven't been attending the meetings A1 AA.4 I’m going to give you some reasons why a bunge might become inactive or stop having regular meetings. Can you please tell me how important each of these reasons is in explaining why this bunge isn’t meeting regularly? 1 not important at all 2 not important 3 important 4 very important AA.4.a Members of the bunge had disagreements with each other and couldn’t get along AA.4.b The leaders of the bunge did not do a good job AA.4.c Bunge members joined hoping to get money from the program, but lost interest when they didn’t believe they would get money AA.4.d Bunge members joined hoping to get some benefit other than money from the program, but lost interest when they weren’t getting that benefit AA.4.e The mobilizer who originally organized the bunge didn’t stay involved to help the bunge keep going AA.4.f The staff from [Implementing Partner] weren’t helpful in keeping the bunge going Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 72 AA.4.g Bunge funds were mismanaged by the leadership AA.4.h Is there another reason?Other(Specify) 1 YES 2 NO AA.4.i Specify [open-ended] AA.4.j Is this reason… 1 nor important at all 2 not important 3 important 4 very important A1 Have you joined another bunge? 1 YES 2 NO  A17a A1.a What is the name of the new bunge you joined? [open-ended] A2 When did you join this bunge? mm/yyyy A3 Do you hold a leadership position within the bunge? 1 YES 2 NO A4 A3.a Which position do you hold? 01 PRESIDENT 02 VICE-PRESIDENT 03 SECRETARY 04 TREASURER/ACCOUNTANT 99 OTHER (SPECIFY) A4 Over the past year, how often has the bunge held meetings? 01 weekly or more often 02 every two weeks 03 every month 04 every other month or so 05 less than once every other month A5 Over the past year, how often have you attended these meetings? 01 frequently A7 02 sometimes 03 only rarely 04 never or almost never A6 Why don't you attend meetings more regularly? 01 i don’t feel welcome 02 i don’t think going to the meetings could benefit me 03 meeting times don’t match my schedule 99 other Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 73 A7 How often have each of the following topics been discussed at bunge meetings 01 frequently 02 sometimes 03 only rarely 04 never A7.1 Politics A7.2 Ethnic issues A7.3 Issues that are important to women, such as gender based violence, or others A7.4 Starting or operating businesses A7.5 Getting jobs A7.6 Relationships between youth and others in the community A8 Have others in the community who are not members of the bunge tried to interfere with what the bunge is doing? 1 YES 2 NOA10 A9 Has this been a problem for the bunge? 1 yes a big problem 2 somewhat of a problem 3 not a problem A10 Does it ever happen that members of the bunge have problems that cause them to become angry with one another? 01 often 02 sometimes 03 never or almost never A11 Did you attend the national Tuko Rada event? 1 YESA13 2 NO A12 Did you see the national Tuko Rada event on television or listen to it on the radio? 1 YES 2 NO I am going to read you some statements about the bunge. Please tell me which of the following is true about being part of the bunge. STATEMENTS A13. Is it true or not true that being part of the bunge … 1 TRUE 2 NOT TRUE  NEXT A14. If yes, how big of a difference has it made? Has it made… 01 a big difference? 02 somewhat of a difference? 03 only a small difference? a has helped me to earn more money b has brought people from different ethnicities closer together c has helped me to have a voice in influencing the national government d has helped me to have a voice in influencing the local government e has brought the members closer to the rest of the community f is a safe place where I can discuss issues that I wouldn’t be able to discuss anywhere else Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 74 Now I would like to ask you some questions about the bunge leaders/officials. A15 Did all of the members of the bunge have the opportunity to participate in choosing the bunge leaders? 1 YES 2 NO A16 Were any of the members of the bunge disappointed about who was chosen as a bunge leader? 1 yes, very much 2 somewhat 3 not at all A17 In general, how good of a job do you think they’re doing? 1 excellent 2 good 3 fair 4 poor 5 very poor We’d like to ask your opinion about some issues related to the Yes Youth Can! program. Please tell me whether you strongly disagree, disagree, agree or strongly agree with the following statements. A17.a It would have been helpful to the bunge if the mobilizer had been more involved than s/he did after the bunge was formed 1 strongly disagree 2 disagree 3 agree 4 strongly agree A17.b My bunge did not receive much guidance after the bunge was formed A17.c It would have been helpful to the bunge if the staff of [implementing partner] had been more involved than they were in terms of providing advice and support A17.d The way YYC! gave out funding was fair and transparent A17.e The process for getting funding through YYC! was too complex. A17.f The YYC! program should have offered more trainings to bunge members on income generating activities A17.g The YYC! program should have offered more trainings to bunge members on other topics such as leadership and organization A17.h In general, the trainings that YYC provided to bunge members were helpful Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 75 Now, I would like to ask you some questions about County Board and the National Youth Bunge System. A18 Do you know who the County Board members are who represent you? 1 YES 2 NO A19 Do you receive information from any of the following sources about the County Board or the National Youth Bunge Association? Please choose all that apply (read responses aloud) 00 face to face from the county board members 01 barazaa 02 sms 03 radio 04 television 05 facebook or internet 06 from the village bunge president 07 from usaid partner or implementing partner 08 church or other public gatherings 09 none of the above a21 A20 Which of these sources is the most important? [FROM THE SOURCES CITED IN A19] 00 face to face from the county board members 01 barazaa 02 sms 03 radio 04 television 05 facebook or internet 06 from the village bunge president 07 from usaid partner or implementing partner 08 church or other public gatherings 09 none of the above A21 Would you like to receive more information about the activities of the County Board or the National Youth Bunge Association, or are you receiving enough already? 01 I WOULD LIKE TO RECEIVE MORE INFORMATION 02 I AM RECEIVING ENOUGH INFORMATIONA23 A22 Which of these sources would be the best way for you to receive more information about the Country Board or National Youth Bunge Association? (read responses aloud) 00 face to face from the county board members 01 barazaa 02 sms 03 radio 04 television 05 facebook or internet 06 from the village bunge president 07 from usaid partner or implementing partner 08 church or other public gatherings 09 none of the above Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 76 Now, I would like to ask you some questions about SACCOs. A23 Are you currently a member of a SACCO that is specifically for bunge members? 1 YESA25 2 NO A24 Is there a SACCO specifically for bunge members that you could join if you wanted to? 1 YES 2 NO SKIP TO SECTION B A25 Do you have savings in the SACCO? 1 YES 2 NOA27 A26 How much savings do you have with the SACCO? A27 Have you received a loan from the SACCO? 1 YES 2 NOSECTION B A28 How much did the SACCO lend to you? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 77 SECTION B. ECONOMIC OUTCOMES Now I would like to ask you about your economic activities. I would like to ask you about activities that you may have done in the past month and in the past 12 months to make a living. Have you done any of the following to make a living: a) Over the past 12 months? 1 YES 2 NO  NEXT b) Over the past one month? 1 YES 2 NO B1.1 Grow crops, raise livestock, conduct business activities together with other members of the bunge or as part of bunge activities? B1.2 Work for someone who is not a member of your household for wages or a salary- for example working for an employer, a firm, the Government, or working for a jua kali or some other person outside your household? B1.3 Grow crops on a plot owned or rented by you or your household? (This is different from the previous question when I asked if you worked for someone elsefor wages or a salary) B1.4 Raise livestock owned by you or your household? B1.5 Conduct business activities for yourself or your household? For example, operating a small business selling something, operating a fishing boat, operating ajua kali, or other independent work? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 78 Subsection B2: Bunge activities [ask if YES to B1.1] You indicated that you did some activities together with other members of the bunge or as part of bunge activities. I would like to ask you about the activities you worked on with other members of the bunge to earn money. Did you earn money from any of the following: a) Over the past 12 months? 1 YES 2 NO  NEXT b) Over the past one month? 1 YES 2 NO B2.1 Growing crops on a field you worked with other bunge members B2.2 Livestock activities with other bunge members (specify) B2.3 Business activities with other bunge members (specify) [COMPLETE IF SAID YES TO B2.1] B2.4 B2.5 B2.6 CODES FOR B2.4 10 MAHANGU 11 MAIZE 12 WHEAT 13 SORGHUM 14 POTATOES 15 SWEET POTATO 16 YAMS 17 GROUNDNUT 18 CASHEW NUT 19 PEANUT 20 BEANS OF ALL KINDS 21 LENTILS 22 PEAS 23 PIGEON PEA 24 COWPEA 25 CHICKPEA 26 CARROTS 27 TOMATOES 28 CABBAGE 29 SPINACH 30 LETTUCE 31 PEPPERS 32 PUMPKIN 33 CUCUMBERS 34 ONIONS 35 MELON 36 ORANGES 37 LEMON 99 OTHER (SPECIFY) Which crops did you grow with other bunge members? SEE CODES [FIELD-CODED] How much money did you individually receive for the [CROP] sold during the last 12 months from this plot in total? (KSh) IF NONE, ENTER 0 How much money did you individually receive for the [CROP] sold during the past one month from this plot in total? (KSh) IF NONE, ENTER 0 CROP 1 |__|__|___________ CROP2 |__|__|___________ CROP3 |__|__|___________ CROP4 |__|__|___________ CROP5 |__|__|___________ Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 79 [COMPLETE IF SAID YES TO B2.2] ANIMAL TYPE B2.7 B2.8a B2.8b Over the past 12 months, have you raised [ANIMAL] with other members of the bunge? How much did you earn from raising [ANIMAL] with other bunge members in the past 12 months in total? (KSh) IF NONE, ENTER 0 How much did you earn from raising [ANIMAL] with other bunge members in the past one month in total? (KSh) IF NONE, ENTER 0 a) Cattle 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL b) Sheep 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL c) Goats 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL d) Poultry 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL e) Pigs 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL f) Other (specify) 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 80 [COMPLETE IF SAID YES TO B2.3] B2.9 B2.10 B2.11 CODES FOR B2.9 10 FARMING/LIVESTOCK 11 FISHING 12 TRADING/SALES 13 JUA KALI 14 TRANSPORT 15 CONSTRUCTION 16 EDUCATION 17 HEALTH 18 CLERICAL 19 FACTORY WORKER 20 RESTAURANT/BAR/ HOTEL/HOSPITALITY 21 OTHER SERVICE INDUSTRY 22 ENTERTAINMENT 99 OTHER (SPECIFY) What kind of business activities did you do with other members of the bunge? May list more than one response ( do not read choices aloud) SEE CODES [FIELD-CODED] How much money did you individually earn from this activity in the past 12 months in total? (KSh) IF NONE, ENTER 0 How much money did you individually earn from this activity in the past one month in total? (KSh) IF NONE, ENTER 0 A C T 1 |__|__| ___________ A C T 2 |__|__| ___________ A C T 3 |__|__| ___________ A C T 4 |__|__| ___________ A C T 5 |__|__| ___________ Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 81 Subsection B3: Wage/Salary Employment [ask if YES to B1.2] You mentioned that you worked for someone who is not a member of your household for wages or a salary in the past month/past 12 months. I would now like to ask you some questions about these activities that you did as an employee. B3.1 B3.2 B3.3 B3.4 B3.5 B3.6 B3.7 CODES FOR B3.1 10 FARMING/LIVESTOCK 11 FISHING 12 TRADING/SALES 13 JUA KALI 14 TRANSPORT 15 CONSTRUCTION 16 EDUCATION 17 HEALTH 18 CLERICAL 19 FACTORY WORKER 20 RESTAURANT/BAR/ HOTEL/HOSPITALITY 21 OTHER SERVICE INDUSTRY 22 ENTERTAINMENT 99 OTHER (SPECIFY) Business Activity ID SEE CODES How many months did you spend on this activity in the past 12 months? Did you do this activity in the past one month? How many days did you spend on this activity in the past one month? On average how much were you paid each day in the form of money? (KSh) IF NONE, ENTER 0 Did you receive any bonuses or in￾kind payments for this work? How much money did you receive in the form of bonuses or in-kind payments in the past 12 monthsin total? (KSh) IF NONE, ENTER 0 A C T 1 |__|__| ___________ 1 YES 2 NO B3.5 1 YES 2 NO B3.8 A C T 2 |__|__| ___________ 1 YES 2 NO B3.5 1 YES 2 NO B3.8 A C T 3 |__|__| ___________ 1 YES 2 NO B3.5 1 YES 2 NO B3.8 A C T 4 |__|__| ___________ 1 YES 2 NO B3.5 1 YES 2 NO B3.8 A C T 5 |__|__| ___________ 1 YES 2 NO B3.5 1 YES 2 NO B3.8 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 82 For any of the business activities you mentioned, was the bunge helpful in the following ways? B3.8 Generating employment for yourself 1 YES 2 NO B3.9 Teaching you skills that were helpful with the business activity 1 YES 2 NO B3.10 Finding employment or information for this activity through another bunge member 1 YES 2 NO B3.11 The bunge helped in some other way [SPECIFY] 1 YES 2 NO Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 83 Subsection B4: Agriculture – [ask if YES to B1.3] You mentioned that you grew crops on a plot owned/rented by you/your household. I would like to ask you about these farming activities. Please tell me which crops you grew in the 12 months. If you have grown more than 5 crops, please tell me your 5 major crops (the ones on which you have spent the most time). B4.1 B4.2 B4.3 B4.4 B4.5 B4.6 B4.7 CODES FOR B4.1 10 MANAGU 11 MAIZE 12 WHEAT 13 SORGHUM 14 POTATOES 15 SWEET POTATO 16 YAMS 17 GROUNDNUT 18 CASHEW NUT 19 PEANUT 20 BEANS OF ALL KINDS 21 LENTILS 22 PEAS 23 PIGEON PEA 24 COWPEA 25 CHICKPEA 26 CARROTS 27 TOMATOES 28 CABBAGE 29 SPINACH 30 LETTUCE 31 PEPPERS 32 PUMPKIN 33 CUCUMBERS 34 ONIONS 35 MELON 36 ORANGES 37 LEMON 99 OTHER (SPECIFY) CODES FOR B4.5 00 NONE 11 KG 12 LITRES 13 BUSHELS 14 BAGS (10 KG) 15 BAGS (12.5 KG) 16 BAGS (20 KG) 17 BAGS (25 KG) 18 BAGS (50 KG) 19 TINS (1 LITRE) 20 TINS (2 LITRES) 21 TINS (5 LITRES) 22 BUNCH 23 CUP 24 CRATES 25 25 LITRE BUCKET 99 OTHER (SPECIFY) Crop ID SEE CODES In terms of the main decisions about growing and selling this crop, who is the main decision￾maker? How much of the earnings or produce from this [CROP] do you get to decide what to do with? During the last 12 months, what quantity of [CROP] did your household harvest? UNIT OF MEASURE FOR B4.4 SEE CODES How much money did your household get for the [CROP] sold during the past 12 months in total? (KSh) IF NONE, ENTER 0 How much money did your household get for the [CROP] sold during the past one month in total? (KSh) IF NONE, ENTER 0 C R O P 1 |__|__| ___________ 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none |__|__| ______ C R O P 2 |__|__| ___________ 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none |__|__| ______ C R O P 3 |__|__| ___________ 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none |__|__| ______ C R O P 4 |__|__| ___________ 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none |__|__| ______ C R O P 5 |__|__| ___________ 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none |__|__| ______ Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 84 For growing any of the crops you mentioned, was the bunge helpful in the following ways? B4.8 Teaching you skills that were helpful with growing these crops 1 YES 2 NO B4.9 Giving you credit for inputs for these crops (credit comes from the bunge) 1 YES 2 NO B4.10 Giving you inputs for these crops (inputs comes directly from the bunge) 1 YES 2 NO B4.11 Provide labor for growing these crops 1 YES 2 NO B4.12 The bunge helped in some other way [SPECIFY] 1 YES 2 NO Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 85 Subsection B5: Livestock- [ask if YES to B1.4] You mentioned that you/your householdraised livestock in the past month/past 12 months. I would like to ask you about these livestock activities. Please tell me which livestock you raised in the past month/12 months. ANIMAL TYPE B5.1 B5.2 B5.3 B5.4 B5.5 B5.6 B5.7 B5.8 Over the past 12 months, has your household raised [ANIMAL]? How many [ANIMAL] were sold in the past 12 months? IF NONE, ENTER 0 AND GO TO B5.6 On average, how much money was received for each [ANIMAL]? Over the past one month, have you raised [ANIMAL]? How many [ANIMAL] were sold in the past one month? IF NONE, ENTER 0 How many [ANIMAL] are currently owned by your household? By “own”, I mean an animal that your household can sell without anyone else’s permission. How many [ANIMAL] were consumed by your household over the past 12 months? IF NONE, ENTER 0 AND GO TO NEXT ANIMAL How many [ANIMAL] were consumed by your household over the past one month? a) Cattle 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL 1 YES 2 NOB5.6 b) Sheep 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL 1 YES 2 NOB5.6 c) Goats 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL 1 YES 2 NOB5.6 d) Poultry 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL 1 YES 2 NOB5.6 e) Pigs 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL 1 YES 2 NOB5.6 f) Other (specify) 1 YES 2 NO NEXT ANIMAL 1 YES 2 NOB5.6 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 86 ANIMAL TYPE B5.9 B5.10 B5.11 B5.12 B5.13 B5.14 During the past 12 months, did you sell any animal by￾products that were made from [ANIMAL] – such as milk, eggs, or skins? What is the total amount of money received from animal by￾products sold in the past 12 months? (KSh) IF NONE, ENTER 0 During the past one month, did you sell any animal by￾products that were made from [ANIMAL] – such as milk, eggs, or skins? What is the total amount of money received from animal by￾products sold in the past one month? (KSh) IF NONE, ENTER 0 In terms of the main decisions about raising and selling [ANIMAL], and selling by products, who is the main decision maker concerning your work on this activity? How much of the earnings or produce from this activity do you get to decide what to do with? a) Cattle 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none b) Sheep 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none c) Goats 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none d) Poultry 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none e) Pigs 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none f) Other (specify) 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 YES 2 NO B5.13 1 MYSELF 2 SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 87 For any of the livestock activities you mentioned, was the bunge helpful in the following ways? B5.15 Teaching you skills that were helpful for this livestock activity 1 YES 2 NO B5.16 Giving you credit for stock for this livestock activity 1 YES 2 NO B5.17 The bunge helped in some other way [SPECIFY] 1 YES 2 NO Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 88 Subsection B6: Business activities- [ask if YES to B1.5] You mentioned earlier that you conducted business activities yourself or with your household in the past month/12 months. I would now like to ask about these business activities. First please tell me which type of business activities you conducted. B6.1 B6.2 B6.3 B6.4 B6.5 B6.6 B6.7 B6.8 B6.9 B6.10 CODES FOR B6.1 10 FARMING/LIVESTOCK 11 FISHING 12 TRADING/SALES 13 JUA KALI 14 TRANSPORT 15 CONSTRUCTION 16 EDUCATION 17 HEALTH 18 CLERICAL 19 FACTORY WORKER 20 RESTAURANT/BAR/ HOTEL/HOSPITALITY 21 OTHER SERVICE INDUSTRY 22 ENTERTAINMENT 99 OTHER (SPECIFY) Business Activity ID SEE CODES In the past 12 months, how many months did you work on this business/did you operate this business? Did you do this activity in the past one month? In the past month, how much did you earn from this business? (KSh) IF NONE, ENTER 0 In a good month, how much do you earn from this business? (KSh) In a bad month, how much do you earn from this business? (KSh) IF NONE, ENTER 0 In the past 12 months, how many months have been good? IF NONE, ENTER 0 In the past 12 months, how many months have been bad? IF NONE, ENTER 0 In terms of the main decisions about this business, who is the main decision-maker concerning your work on this activity? How much of the earnings or produce from this activity do you get to decide what to do with? A C T 1 |__|__| ___________ 1 YES 2 NO B6.5 1 MYSELF 2SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none A C T 2 |__|__| ___________ 1 YES 2 NO B6.5 1 MYSELF 2SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none A C T 3 |__|__| ___________ 1 YES 2 NO B6.5 1 MYSELF 2SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 89 A C T 4 |__|__| ___________ 1 YES 2 NO B6.5 1 MYSELF 2SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none A C T 5 |__|__| ___________ 1 YES 2 NO B6.5 1 MYSELF 2SPOUSE 3 PARENT 4 OTHER 1 all 2 most 3 some 4 none For any of the business activities you mentioned, was the bunge helpful in the following ways? B6.11 Teaching you skills that were helpful for this business activity 1 YES 2 NO B6.12 Giving you credit for stock for this business activity 1 YES 2 NO B6.13 The bunge helped in some other way [SPECIFY] 1 YES 2 NO Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 90 Subsection B7: Other income (ask all respondents) I want to ask you about some other ways people get money that we haven't talked about yet. Have you received money from any of the following (if yes, prompt for how much) a) Over the past 12 months? 1 YES 2 NO  NEXT aa) How much did you receive over the past 12 months? (KSh) b) Over the past one month? 1 YES 2 NO NEXT bb) How much did you receive over the past one month? (KSh) B7.1 Income from the sale of durable goods, such as cars, radios, bicycles, etc. B7.2 Income from sale or rental of land B7.3 Remittances(money sent to you from someone outside of your household) B7.4 Pension B7.5 Grants or other funds from the government B7.6 Medical insurance or life insurance B7.7 Interest on savings, credit society, or other bank accounts B7.8 Lottery winnings, gambling or games of chance B7.9 Community merry-go round, table banking B7.10 Harambe (fundraising amongst friends and relatives) B7.11 Inheritance B7.12 Other (specify) Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 91 SECTION C: POLITICAL EMPOWERMENT AND INCLUSION Now I would like to ask about your opinion on politics and some current issues. C1 Here is a list of actions that people sometimes take as citizens. For each of these, please tell me whether you, personally, have done any of these things during the past year. If not, would you do this if you had the chance? (If yes: Yes, often; Yes, several times; Yes, once or twice) (If no: No, but would do it if had the chance; No, would never do this) 4 Yes, often 3 Yes, several times 2 Yes, once or twice 1 No, would never do this 0 No, but would do it if had the chance C1.1 Discussed politics with friends or neighbors C1.2 Attended a community meeting C1.3 Got together with others to raise an issue C1.4 Attended a demonstration or protest march C1.5 Used force or violence for a political cause C2 Do you agree or disagree with the following statements? 1 strongly agree 2 agree 3 disagree 4 strongly disagree C2.1 Politics and government sometimes seem so complicated that you can’t really understand what’s going on. C2.2 As far as politics are concerned, friends and neighbors do not take my opinion seriously C2.3 If you had to, you would be able to join with others to make elected representatives listen C2.4 The new devolved government is working with our bunge because we are organized C3 During the past year, how often have you contacted any of the following persons for help to solve a problem or to give them your views? 1 often 2 a few times 3 only once 4 never C3.1 A Local Government councilor or county assembly person C3.2 A District Commissioner C3.3 A Member of Parliament C3.4 An official of a government ministry C3.5 A political party official C3.6 A religious leader Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 92 C3.7 Local elders C3.8 A Community-Owned Resource Person C3.9 Retirees C3.10 Opinion leaders C3.11 Some other influential person (prompt if necessary: You know, someone with more money or power than you who can speak on your behalf.) C4 When there are problems with how local government is run in your community, how much can an ordinary person do to improve the situation? 1 a lot 2 a little 3 nothing C5 How easy or difficult is it for an ordinary person to have his voice heard when elections are not happening? 1 very easy 2 somewhat easy 3 somewhat difficult 4 very difficult C6 Do you believe [ENTITY] (is/are) taking into account your interests and the interests of other young people in Kenya when making decisions? 1 yes, a lot 2 yes, somewhat 3 yes, a little 4 not at all C6.1 Any of the political parties C6.2 Parliament C6.3 Local councilors C6.4 District-level government C7 For people like you, do you think things in Kenya will get better or worse in the years to come? 1 a lot better 2 a little better 3 same 4 a little worse 5 a lot worse C8 With regard to the most recent national elections, which statement is true for you? 1 You voted in the elections 2 You decided not to vote 3 You could not find the polling station 4 You were prevented from voting 5 You did not have time to vote 6 You were not registered 7 Did not vote for some other reason Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 93 SECTION D: TRUST AND SOCIAL CAPITAL Now I would like to ask you some questions about the community in which you live. These questions are designed to help us understand how you and your friends and neighbors interact with one another and work together. D1. Are you a member of [GROUP]? 1 YES 2 NONEXT GROUP D2 Have you ever taken a leadership role in the organization? 1 YES 2 NO a A drama, music, or dance club? b A farmers group or cooperative? c A religious group (church/mosque, prayer or bible study group)? d A self-help group? e A school committee or school club? f A sports team? g An NGO (as a volunteer)? h A group that mobilizes the community for meetings? i A special interest group (physically disabled,community in arid areas) j A pressure group (e.g. political activitism groups) k Other (SPECIFY: ________________________________________) D3 Suppose something unfortunate happened to someone in the village, such as a serious illness. How likely is it that some people in the village would get together to help them? 1 very likely 2 somewhat likely 3 somewhat unlikely 4 completely unlikely D4 If you suddenly needed to borrow a small amount of money, enough to pay for expenses for your household for one week: 1 YES 2 NO D4.1 Are there people beyond your immediate family and close relatives who would be willing to help you? D4.2 Are there people outside of your ethnic group who would help you? D5 In general, do you agree or disagree with this statement: Most people who live in this village can be trusted 1 strongly agree 2 somewhat agree 3 somewhat disagree 4 strongly disagree Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 94 SECTION E. ATTITUDES/BEHAVIORS TOWARDS ETHNICITY AND VIOLENCE E1 We have spoken to many people in Kenya and they have all described themselves in different ways. Some people describe themselves in terms of their language, religion, race, and others describe themselves in economic terms, such as working class, middle class, or a farmer. Besides being Kenyan which specific group do you feel you belong to first and foremost? E2 Let’s go back to talking about you. What is your ethnicity? [Do NOT read options. Code from response] 01 KIKUYU 02 LUO 03 LUHYA 04 KAMBA 05 MERU 06 KISII 07 KALENJIN 08 MASAI 09 MIJIKENDA 10 TAITA 11 SOMALI 12 POKOT 13 TURKANA 14 BAJUNI 15 KURIA 16 TESO 17 RENDILLE 18 EMBU 19 BORANA 20 SAMBURU 21 ARAB 22 SWAHILI 23 INDIAN 24 KENYAN ONLY (DOESN’T THINK OF SELF IN THOSE TERMS) SKIP TO E5 99 OTHER(SPECIFY: ___________) E3 Let us suppose that you had to choose between being a Kenyan and being a ________[ETHNIC GROUP]. Which of the following statements best expresses your feelings? 1 I feel only Kenyan 2 I feel more Kenyan than [INSERT ETHNIC GROUP] 3 I feel equally Kenyan and [INSERT ETHNIC GROUP] 4 I feel more [INSERT ETHNIC GROUP] than Kenyan 5 I feel only [INSERT ETHNIC GROUP] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 95 Now I would like to ask you some questions about your feelings towards conflicts and violence. E5 In your experience, how often do violent conflicts arise between people: 0 never 1 rarely 2 sometimes 3 often E5.1 Within your own family? E5.2 Within the community where you live? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 96 SECTION F. SELF-EFFICACY Now I’d like to ask you about how you have felt in the past year. For each of the following statements, please tell me how true you think it is for you: 1 not at all true 2 hardly true 3 moderately true 4 exactly true F1 I can always manage to solve my problems if I try hard enough F2 If someone opposes me, I can find the means and ways to get what I want F3 I am certain I can accomplish my goals F4 I am confident that I could deal effectively with unexpected events F5 Thanks to my resourcefulness, I can handle unforeseen situations F6 I can solve most problems if I invest the necessary effort F7 I can remain calm when facing difficulties because I can rely on my strength to cope F8 When I am confronted with a problem, I always look for an alternative solution F9 If I am in trouble, I can think of a good solution F10 I can handle whatever comes my way Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 97 SECTION G.RESPONDENT DEMOGRAPHICS Now I would like to ask you a few more questions about yourself. G1 How old did you turn at your last birthday? G2 What is the highest level of education you have completed? [Code from answer. Do not read options] 00 NO FORMAL SCHOOLING 01 INFORMAL SCHOOLING ONLY (INCLUDING KORANIC SCHOOLING) 02 SOME PRIMARY SCHOOLING 03 PRIMARY SCHOOL COMPLETED 04 SOME SECONDARY SCHOOL / HIGH SCHOOL 05 SECONDARY SCHOOL / HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETED 06 POST-SECONDARY QUALIFICATIONS, OTHER THAN UNIVERSITY E.G. A DIPLOMA OR DEGREE FROM A TECHNICAL INSTITUTE OR COLLEGE 07 SOME UNIVERSITY 08 UNIVERSITY COMPLETED 09 POST-GRADUATE G3 What is your religion, if any? 00 NO RELIGION 01 CHRISTIAN 02 MUSLIM 99 OTHER (SPECIFY) G4 Which best describes your living situation? 01 i live in my parents house 02 i live in the house of other relatives 03 i rent a room in someone else’s house 04 i rent a house 05 i live in my own house G5 Are you married? 01 YES 02 NO G6 Who would you say in the main income earner in your household? 01 MYSELF 02 MY SPOUSE 03 A PARENT 04 ANOTHER RELATIVE 05 OTHER G7 Have you always lived in this village? 01 YES  SECTION H 02 NO G8 How many years have you lived in this village? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 98 SECTION H.HOUSEHOLD ASSETS H1 Which of these things do you or your household own? 1 YES, OWN 2 NO, DON’T OWN  NEXT ITEM H.1 Radio H.2 Television H.3 Bicycle H.4 Motorcycle H.5 Car H.6 Cell phone H.7 Clock/watch H.8 Tape or CD Player H.9 Gas/charcoal stove H.10 Sewing machine H.11 Refrigerator H.12 Table H.13 Chairs H.14 Cupboard H.15 Mattress H.16 Generator Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 99 H19 Where is your main source of water for household use located? 01 INSIDE THE HOUSE 02 INSIDE THE COMPOUND 03 OUTSIDE THE COMPOUND H20 What is your dwelling’s flooring material? 01 EARTH/SAND/MUD 02 WOOD 03 CONCRETE/CEMENT 04 CERAMIC TILE 99 OTHER H21 What is your dwelling’s wall material? 01 CARDBOARD 02 MUD/MUD BRICKS 03 METAL SHEETS 04 CONCRETE 05 STONE H22 What is your dwelling’s roofing material? 01 GRASS/THATCH 02 METAL/IRON SHEETS 03 CONCRETE/CEMENT 04 TILES (CLAY TILES) 05 PLASTIC SHEET/TARP This is end of our interview. Thank you very much for spending the time to answer these questions with me today. I1.11 INTERVIEW END TIME (USE 24-HOUR FORMAT) |__|__|:|__|__| Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 100 SECTION J. INTERVIEWER OBSERVATIONS ENUMERATOR: COMPLETE THIS SECTION AFTER SECTION H HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND YOU HAVE LEFT THE RESPONDENT’S HOME. J1 RESPONDENT'S GENDER 01 MALE 02 FEMALE J2 RESPONDENT’S RACE 01 BLACK / AFRICAN 02 SOUTH ASIAN (INDIAN, PAKISTANI, ETC.) 03 WHITE / EUROPEAN 04 EAST ASIAN (CHINESE, KOREAN, INDONESIAN, ETC.) 05 COLOURED / MIXED RACE 06 ARAB / LEBANESE / NORTH AFRICAN 99 OTHER J3 WHAT WAS THE PRIMARY LANGUAGE USED IN THE INTERVIEW? 01 ENGLISH 02 KISWAHILI 03 KIKUYU 04 LUO 05 LUHYA 06 KAMBA 07 KALENJIN 08 SOMALI 99 OTHER [SPECIFY]: _______________________ J4 WERE THERE ANY OTHER PEOPLE IMMEDIATELY PRESENT WHO MIGHT BE LISTENING DURING THE INTERVIEW? 00 NO ONE 01 SPOUSE ONLY 02 CHILDREN ONLY 03 SPOUSE AND CHILDREN ONLY 04 A FEW OTHERS 05 SMALL CROWD J5 DID THE RESPONDENT CHECK WITH OTHERS FOR INFORMATION TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION? 1 YES 2 NO J6 DO YOU THINK ANYONE INFLUENCED THE RESPONDENT’S ANSWERS DURING THE INTERVIEW? 1 YES 2 NO END OF INTERVIEW Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 101 Q3:Respondent Address: ____ Q4:Postal Code: ______ Q5:Respondent Telephone Number: _________ Q10: Physical Location: _____ Q12 : How many attempts did it take to complete this interview? (Include the final successful attempt) ? Choose number 1-5 Date Time Disposition Code Comments Q13 : Result of attempt #1 __/__/__ __;__ __ Q14 : Result of attempt #2 __/__/__ __;__ __ Q15 : Result of attempt #3 __/__/__ __;__ __ Q16 : Result of attempt #4 __/__/__ __;__ __ Q17 : Result of attempt #5 __/__/__ __;__ __ # Disposition Codes: 1 No one at home 2 Impossible to contact; No contact number and other members could not trace respondent 3 Impossible to contact; number given not reachable/not going through 4 Impossible to contact the family/child answered the call,etc 5 Member of the family asks to postpone the interview until another time 6 Family member refused 7 Respondent did not turn up for interview 8 Respondent is not able to participate in the interview (illness,drunk,etc) 9 Respondent is not at home 10 Respondent is away from the home for extended time for a business trip,vacation,etc. 11 Respondent doesn’t have time and asks to postpone the interview until a more appropriate time 12 Direct refusal Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline Questionnaire - Member | Page 102 13 Incomplete interview (specify why) 14 Respondent couldn’t speak any language in common with the interviewer 15 Other(specify why) 16 Successful attempt Q7: Interviewer Name: _____ Q8: Interviewer Number: _____ Q9: GPS Location: ____ Interview/Supervisor Comments ____ Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline FGD Guide | Page 103 E. BASELINE FGD GUIDE Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline FGD Guide | Page 104 TNS RMS East Africa Limited TNS RMS Centre, Mpaka Road, Westlands, P.o Box 11505 00400, Nairobi. Telephone +254 20 4280000 Website - www.tns.com ~ Discussion Guide 1) Introduction a) Introduce yourself, reasons for the meeting, the process and rules of engagement. Emphasize the need for honesty and openness b) Explain the need / purpose of recording the discussion c) Request respondents to introduce themselves d) Encourage respondents to talk as freely as possible. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline FGD Guide | Page 105 1.) All Participants – Part 1 ASK ALL GROUPS General evaluation of livelihoods in their area and changes/impacts over time e) Introduce a brief background on some key events in the area, i.e. economic, demographic, land tenure, farming, etc to inform and roll out the discussion f) Briefly to explore life in general in the village/estate? i) Current economic livelihoods. How is life nowadays in this village/estate? PROBE (1) What is good about life in this area? Anything you are happy about? (2) How do they sustain their lives? Are they actively engaged in any income generating activities? PROBE – which activities are they engaged in, why these activities only? Where do they engage in these activities? (3) For how long have they been engaged in these income generating activities? PROBE each individual. (4) Explore challenges they experience while engaging in these economic activities? (5) If they were to switch from the current income generating activities they are engaged in what would make them switch? PROBE (6) Imagine they had an alternative activity which activity would they opt for and why? (7) Explore life challenges in this area? Anything you are not happy about? (8) How are these challenges overcome? PROBE – things done at individual, group and community level? ii) Economic, social and political impacts (1) Projective technique - Participatory mapping 1. Provide a sheet and request all respondents to draw a map of their region – could be the village or estate, indicating what resources are available and where. After this, discuss the map – resources, i.e. who are engaged in these resources, when, why/why not, challenges, etc 2. Request respondents to draw a social map of their area, indicating settlements- indicate who lives where? Etc. Discuss – key features of these settlements and reasons 3. Request respondents to draw 2 historical maps pointing out their residential area, say 30 years ago and now- 2012. After this, please discuss what has changed and causal factors – e.g. land tenure, (2) Projective technique - daily activity. Explore their program Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline FGD Guide | Page 106 1. Explore morning to evening, Monday to Sunday – activities engages in, with whom and length of time spend and reasons for this. 2. Explore challenges they experience in their daily activities which hinder their full activation and how these can be overcome? 3. Explore social relationships – how they spend time both when engaged or in their free time, their friends and whether they are from the same ethnic group. (3) Projective technique - (mobility analysis). Explore their mobility and resource flows into their area/community 1. Do they ever travel or walk out of their region (village/estate? If yes, what makes them travel out of their area? PROBE – reasons, when, where and what they go to do outside their area, challenges and barriers 2. What about other village/community members? Do they also move or travel to other areas away from their village/estate? Why and to where? When? PROBE 3. What about outsiders? Do outsiders visit their area? PROBE – who visits (PROBE civilians, politicians, other people), when, why, how often? PROBE (4) Projective technique - Seasonal Calendar-PROBE 1. The busiest month and what happens then – economic, social, political. What happens? Who is engaged in this? Why? For how long? Is there any benefit in people engaging in these activities? PROBE – social, economic, political 2. Next busiest month, etc to the least busy month. Explore what happens? What contributes to this? How people in their area can be made to be busier during this month? What should be done / shouldn’t be done? Ethnicity, culture, political consciousness and participation Ethnicity and culture g) Is there anything or anyone or a people you admire in this community? PROBE – who are these, what makes you admire them, etc h) Is there anything or anyone or a people you do not admire in this village/community? PROBE – who are these, what makes you admire them, etc i) Is there anything you can describe as good about the people living in this community/village? PROBE j) Please tell me anything you like about the people living in this village/community? PROBE Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline FGD Guide | Page 107 k) If you had an opportunity and power to change anything in this community what would you change? PROBE l) For the period you have lived in this village/community have you experienced any forms of violence? PROBE – forms of violence, causes, victims, perpetrators and what can be done to prevent or stop them from happening. Is this on the rise or is declining? m) If you were to choose between living in this village / community or moving away from this village to somewhere else which one would you choose? PROBE for reasons – social cultural, economic, political or ethnic n) And looking at 5 years to come how do you see life in this village/community? PROBE – will it get better or worse, why? Political consciousness o) What about politics? Do you know what politics is all about/involve? PROBE p) Would anyone here want to become a politician in future? PROBE – why, what would want to become, etc q) Let is now discuss about politics and the village/community members? PROBE – motivations to engage in politics, challenges, barriers and how these barriers can be overcome Political participation r) There are organizations that either work with or for the people in various regions in our country. Do we have such organizations here in your area? s) IF YES, what are the names of these organizations? t) What do you know about these organizations? PROBE u) Have you either worked with or been served by any of them? PROBE v) Is there anything you like or dislike about these organizations? PROBE w) And we also have many political parties or organizations in Kenya. Do you know the names of these political parties? PROBE – any other x) PICK ON TOP 3 MENTIONS AND EXPLORE. Do you know what political party X/Y/Z stands for? PROBE – what is the difference between party X and Y and Z? y) Have you ever been involved with any of these political parties? PROBE – at what level, on what specific issues/functions? z) Have you attended any political rally in this area? PROBE – which party and why? aa) Is anyone amongst you a registered member of any political party? PROBE – which party, why? bb) What about politicians. Do they ever visit this area? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline FGD Guide | Page 108 cc) Does anyone of you at all interact with them whenever they visit? PROBE – motivations dd) Is there anything you like about their visits to this place? PROBE ee) Do you have any challenges with politicians visiting this area? PROBE ff) Is there anything you don’t like about their visits to this place? PROBE gg) If you were to recommend solutions to politicians visiting this place what would you tell them? hh) Have you ever voted? PROBE-motivations ii) How likely are you to vote in the next general election? PROBE Social cohesion and integration. Membership in youth initiatives, involvement and benefits jj) Is anyone a member of any group, whether formal or informal in this village/estate/community? IF YES, PROBE – name of the group, for how long s/he has been a member kk) Membership - requirements, composition by ethnicity, age, religion, etc ll) Motivation to become a member of the group/initiative? PROBE mm) PROBE for group objectives, expectations at the time joining the group/initiative? nn) PROBE for individual contribution to those initiative/objectives. What is your role in the group or activities, etc oo) Ask whether they have realized anything – direct benefits or otherwise from their participation in the group activities? PROBE Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline FGD Guide | Page 109 2.) YYC Bunge Members ASK TREATMENT GROUP ONLY Evaluation of bunges i) When did you become a member of this bunge? ii) What made you join this bunge? PROBE for motivations iii) Explore their understanding of the bunge initiatives (a) Functions of the bunge (b) Its activities in the community. What do you do both for yourselves and for this community? PROBE (c) Achievements and barriers – Have you achieved anything since you joined? PROBE. What about challenges? PROBE iv) Is there anything you like/dislike about this bunge? Isa bunge at all important ?Probe v) Do you have any questions about bunge in general ort specifically about your bunge….is there something you feel is not clear? vi) Has this bunge been of any help or benefit to you or your community? PROBE vii) Would you consider leaving this bunge in future? What would make you consider leaving this bunge? PROBE viii) Does this idea of bunge remind you of anything either here in this community or in our country at large? Probe (d) Who is behind this idea? (e) Do you believe this idea? PROBE (f) Is this idea of youth & bunges convincing? Probe ix) Do we have other similar groups in their community/area? PROBE for; names, objectives of the groups, challenges and achievements Comparison of bunges vs. other community self improvement groups 2) Is there anything you are doing as a bunge that is similar to other youth groups in this area? PROBE a) What is different about the ideas behind these groupings? b) Which group ideas do you like most? Why? c) Which group idea would you say you dislike most? d) What would you propose in view of these to your bunge? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline FGD Guide | Page 110 3.) YYC Community Members ASK NON BUNGE MEMBERS (CONTROL GROUP) ONLY AWARENESS AND REACTIONS TO THE EXISTENCE OF BUNGES (1) Have you heard of youth groups called bunge? (2) PROBE – How did you learn of bunge? What did you hear about bunge? What is bunge for? Who are its members? What should one do to become a member? (3) Where is this bunge? Is it near here or is it far away from here? (4) Explore their opinion on bunge if they have a fair understanding of bunge, i.e. (g) Objectives of bunge (h) Membership in bunge (i) Functions of the bunge (j) Its activities in the community (5) What are the questions you have about youth bunges….is there something you feel is not clear? (6) Is a bunge of any benefit to its members or community or both? PROBE (7) Would you consider joining a bunge in future? PROBE - what would make you either consider joining or not joining one? (8) Is there anything you like/dislike about this idea of youth bunges? Is bunge at all important to you? Probe (9) Does this idea of youth bunges remind you of anything either here in this community or in our country at large? Probe (k) Where did this idea emanate from? PROBE (l) Do you believe this idea? (m) What would you propose in place of this idea? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline FGD Guide | Page 111 4.) All Participants – Part 2 ASK ALL Draw Venn diagrams e) Write down of all social/economic and political groups in the area and ask respondents to map their relationship on paper/flip chart through Venn diagrams to show relationships between these groups, i.e. i) Ethnic groups ii) Income groups iii) Youth iv) Police v) Administrators vi) Religious groups vii) Politicians viii) Cultural groups ix) Villages, etc f) Probe for differences in relationships as appears in Venn diagrams and reasons Close the discussion and say Thank you for participating in our research study today. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline FGD Guide | Page 112 F. ENDLINE FGD GUIDE Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline FGD Guide | Page 113 Focus Group Sample There will be four types of focus groups:  Members of active bunges – 36 FGDs  The sample will be stratified by region and bunge primary activity as follows: Central Coast Nairobi Nyanza Rift Valley Western Total Agriculture including crop farming, crop marketing, greenhouse/nurseries, etc. 0 2 0 5 4 2 13 Livestock including animal raising, selling of animal products, fish ponds, etc. 1 2 0 5 2 1 11 Income generating activities not related to livestock or agriculture 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 Table banking 1 0 0 1 1 1 4 Community service, including providing trainings to the community, construction projects to benefit the community, etc. 1 1 1 1 1 0 5 Social/entertainment/arts 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Total 3 6 3 12 8 4  To select the sample: o Prior to the baseline survey, USAID provided rosters of all bunges in each region, which included the name and contact information of the bunge leader. The follow-up FGD sample should be selected through a process of randomly choosing bunges from each region, contacting the leader, and asking the following screening questions:  Does the bunge still meet regularly?  Would the members of the bunge be willing to participate in a focus group discussion?  Which of the following activities best describes the bunge’s primary purpose [list activities in first column of table]? o If the randomly selected bunge is missing contact information for the leader, the leader cannot be reached, or the leader indicates the bunge would not participate, a different bunge should be selected. There is no need to make repeated attempts to contact the leader or to try to obtain contact information in cases where it is not provided on the roster.  Focus groups should be consist of at least 1/3 males and at least 1/3 females Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline FGD Guide | Page 114  Other members of communities where YYC is active – 6 FGDs  One FGD should be conducted in each region  Bunge leaders should be contacted in advance to verify that the bunge is still active  FGD participants should represent different demographic groups within the communities  Focus groups should be consist of at least 1/3 males and at least 1/3 females  Youths in non-YYC communities – 4 FGDs  These should be drawn from four different comparison locations in different Provinces  Focus groups should include at least one participant in each of the following three age ranges: 18-24, 25-30, 31-35  Focus groups should be consist of at least 1/3 males and at least 1/3 females  Members of dissolved bunges – 2 FGDs  These should be selected from two different Provinces and identified by contacting bunge leaders in advance to identify areas where the bunge is no longer operating but the bunge leader believes former members can be brought together for a focus group  Focus groups should be consist of at least 1/3 males and at least 1/3 females Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline FGD Guide | Page 115 Introduction and Consent The Moderator should read the following consent script: Hello and thank you for agreeing to talk with me. My name is [name of interviewer] and I represent TNS, a research organization based in Nairobi. Assisting me is [name] who will be taking notes during the meeting. We are visiting here today conducting a survey to better understand the lives of young people. This information is important to know as it will give us information on the role of youths in Kenyan society. We are going to be asking you about the Yes Youth Can! program. This was a project that is being carried out by [implementing partner], and funded by USAID. The program works with youth in this area to organize them into groups called bunges in order to do different kinds of activities together, such as agriculture, community service, or table banking/Chama/Merry go round. My role here is to ask questions and listen, since I want to hear your opinions and experience. I also want to mention that there are no right or wrong answers, so I want to encourage you to be very honest and share with us any ideas that you might have. We are interested in both positive and negative experiences. We will be recording this interview so that we can focus on what you are telling us, review the tapes later, and not forget anything that was said. These tapes will not be released to anyone outside of our research group and they will be destroyed at the end of our study. Your identity will be kept confidential and we will ensure that it will not be possible for you to be identified by any information provided in our reporting. So please feel free to speak your mind and be audible enough for the recorder. Your participation is completely voluntary and you can choose to not answer any question or stop participating at any time. However, I want to remind you that your participation is very important, your input will assist international organizations to make their development programs more efficient and tailored to the needs of our country. This discussion will last approximately one hour. The information you give will be stored safely for the duration of the project and will be kept until at least 2015 for the purposes of preparing reports. If you have any questions about the survey, you may contact Geoffrey Kimani at TNS, on this phone number: 020 4280 000 or Direct Line 020 4280 320. [START THE RECORDER TO GET VERBAL CONSENT] Do you agree to participate in today’s discussion? [IF YES, CONTINUE DISCUSSION] May we begin? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline FGD Guide | Page 116 General Information (complete before interview in consultation with bunge leader) 1. Type of FGD a. Members of active bunge b. Other members of communities where YYC is active c. Youths in non-YYC communities d. Members of dissolved bunges Bunge information (not applicable for FGD type b - other members of community where YYC is active and c. Youths in non-YYC communities) 2. Name of bunge: ___________________________________ 3. Main activity of bunge: a. Agriculture b. Livestock c. Table Banking d. Community Service e. Entertainment/tourism f. Other ____________________ 4. Approximate date that bunge formed : ____________________________ 5. Approximate date that bunge stopped meeting (d. Members of dissolved bunges only) :__________ 6. Date of interview: ________________________________________ 7. Location of interview : a. Village ___________________ b. Sub-Location ______________ c. Location __________________ d. Region __________________ 8. Moderator : ____________________________________________ 9. Note-taker (if any): ________________________________________ 10. Start time: _________ End time: ______________ Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline FGD Guide | Page 117 1.) Bunge Member FGD Guide Economic Empowerment 1. In terms of income generating activities for youths in Kenya today, what would you see as the main opportunities and also the main challenges? a. Did [name of bunge] have any role to play in presenting opportunities or overcoming challenges? Please explain why or why not. 2. Is organizing into a group like [name of bunge] a good way for youths to pursue income generating activities? Why or why not? If not, what might be a better way? Political empowerment and inclusion 3. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: local government officials such as the member of county assembly or governor or county Commissioner in this area listen to youths and take their views and interests into account a. Why or why not? b. Do you think [name of bunge] has helped to improve the situation? 4. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: the national government listens to youths and takes their views and interests into account a. Why or why not? b. Do you think the bunge system has helped to improve the situation? Community participation and self-efficacy 5. Do youths have enough opportunity to participate in the decisions and activities of the community? a. If yes, how? b. If no, why not? c. Do you think the [name of bunge] helped to improve the situation? 6. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: in general, youths in Kenya feel that they can overcome the challenges they face in life and accomplish their goals? a. Has the [name of bunge] contributed to youths feeling that they can overcome challenges and accomplish their goals? How? b. What else could be done to help youths feel more like they can overcome their challenges and accomplish their goals? Violence 7. After the presidential election in March 2013, people were concerned about violence like Kenya experienced in 2007, but the situation remained peaceful. a. What role did youth play in keeping the situation peaceful? b. Did the [name of bunge] help to keep the situation peaceful? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline FGD Guide | Page 118 8. Do you feel that participating in bunges has made youths less prone to violence generally? Why or why not? General views about YYC! 9. What aspects of the YYC program would you say have been the most positive for you? 10. Has there been anything about YYC that disappointed you? What? 11. What, if anything, do you think YYC could have done differently to be more effective? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline FGD Guide | Page 119 2.) YYC Community Member FGD Guide 1. Have you heard of the Yes Youth Can! Program? 2. There is a group (some groups) in your village called [names of all bunges in village]. Are you aware of this (any of these) groups, who the members are, and what activities it is (they are) doing? If yes please answer the following questions. If there is more than one bunge in the village, the respondents should focus on the one they know the best. a. Do you think [name of bunge] has been helpful for the youth? Please give some examples. b. Do you think [name of bunge] has helped the community? Why or why not? c. Has [name of bunge] changed the way you look at young people in this community? If so, how? 3. What is your opinion about the economic opportunities that youths in Kenya have today? a. Do you think youths forming organizations with one another like bunges can help to improve the economic opportunities for youths? If yes, how? If no, why not? 4. Do you think youths in Kenya are aware of political issues and have the opportunity to participate in the political process in Kenya? a. Do you think organizations like bunges can help to make youths more aware of political issues and more able to participate in politics? If yes, how? If no, why not? 5. Do you think youths are able to play an active role in the decisions and activities of the community? Why or why not? a. Do you think organizations like the bunge have helped youths to play more of an active role in the community? If yes, how? If no why not? 6. Of all the challenges facing youth in Kenya, which do you think are the most important? a. Do you think organizations like the bunge have been helpful in addressing these challenges for youth in this community? If yes, how? If no, why not? b. What else could be done to help youths overcome these challenges? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline FGD Guide | Page 120 3.) Youths in Non-YYC Communities FGD Guide 1. In this community, are youths able to come together and organize themselves to accomplish their goals? a. If yes, please describe some instances where this has happened b. If not, why not? 2. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: in general, youths in Kenya feel that they can overcome the challenges they face in life and accomplish their goals a. What could be done to help youths feel more like they can overcome their challenges and accomplish their goals? 3. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: If the youths in this area were more organized and could form a group where they could work together, that would help them to be more aware of political issues and participate in the political process. a. What are your reasons for agreeing or disagreeing? 4. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: if the youths in this area were more organized and could form a group where they could work together, this would help them in pursuing economic activities a. What are your reasons for agreeing or disagreeing? 5. Do youths in this area have a voice in the decisions and activities of the community? a. Do you think that if youths were more organized, they would have more of a voice in the decisions and activities of the community? If yes, why? If no, why not? 6. Have you heard of the Yes Youth Can! program? a. If yes, what have you heard about it? b. Please tell us both the positive or negative things you have heard about it. c. If yes, do you think it would be good for youths in this community to organize themselves into bunges? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline FGD Guide | Page 121 4.) Members of Dissolved Bunges FGD Guide 1. What were the most important reasons that [name of bunge] stopped meeting? 2. In the time that it was meeting, did [name of bunge] bring any benefits to its members? If so, please explain. 3. Are there any ways that [name of bunge] could have done things differently and been more successful at helping its members with income generating activities? Please explain. 4. Are there any ways that [name of bunge] could have done things differently and been more successful at helping its members become more aware and able to participate in politics? Please explain. 5. Are there any ways that [name of bunge] could have done things differently and been more successful at helping its members become more involved in the community? Please explain. 6. Are there any ways that [name of bunge] could have done things differently and been more successful at helping its members to feel better about themselves and more empowered to accomplish their goals? Please explain. 7. Is there anything that hasn’t been mentioned yet that [name of bunge] could have done differently to bring more benefits to its members? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline KII Guide | Page 122 G. BASELINE KII GUIDE TNS RMS East Africa Limited TNS RMS Centre, Mpaka Road, Westlands, P.o Box 11505 00400, Nairobi. Telephone +254 20 4280000 Website - www.tns.com Prepared for use by TNS RMS staff only Annex iii: Baseline KII Guide | Page 123 1.) Key Stakeholder Interview Guide – Implementers, Police, Ministry of Youth Official, Media Guide questions for key staff of YYC program members, to determine what they found to be the strengths and weaknesses of the initiative. Introduction Key Components: • Thank you • Your name • Purpose • Confidentiality • Duration • How interview will be conducted • Opportunity for questions • Signature of consent I want to thank you for taking the time to meet with me today. My name is _____ and I would like to talk to you about your experiences participating in the Yes Youth Can (YYC) project. Specifically, as one of the components of our overall program evaluation we are assessing program effectiveness in order to capture lessons that can be used in future interventions. The interview should take less than an hour. I will be taping the session because I don’t want to miss any of your comments. Although I will be taking some notes during the session, I can’t possibly write fast enough to get it all down. Because we’re on tape, please be sure to speak up so that we don’t miss your comments. All responses will be kept confidential. This means that your interview responses will only be shared with research team members and we will ensure that any information we include in our report does not identify you as the respondent. Remember, you don’t have to talk about anything you don’t want to and you may end the interview at any time. Are there any questions about what I have just explained? Are you willing to participate in this interview? __________________ Interviewee Witness Date_____________________ TNS RMS East Africa Limited TNS RMS Centre, Mpaka Road, Westlands, P.o Box 11505 00400, Nairobi. Telephone +254 20 4280000 Website - www.tns.com Prepared for use by TNS RMS staff only Annex iii: Baseline KII Guide | Page 124 Questions I would like to explore your involvement as an institution in the YYC project/program 1) Are you or were you directly or indirectly engaged at any stage in the YYC program/project OR have you at all been involved in this program? PROBE IF YES, EXPLORE PROGRAM ELEMENTS 2) How are you involved as an institution in this program? PROBE IF DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE PROGRAM ASK 3) What strategies, interventions and tools do you or did you use in your engagement in the YYC program (PROBE – objectives, how they plan, set up of bunges and involvement with bunges, assessment tool used to admit members, curricula used in training, etc)? PROBE. 4) Which of these strategies, interventions and tools used would consider key in this program? PROBE. 5) To what extent does or did your organization’s involvement or participation in the YYC/USAID partnership program advance or hinder project implementation? PROBE. 6) What is working or worked well? PROBE - please elaborate. 7) What would you do differently next time if you were to continue working on the program? Please explain why. 8) What strategies, interventions, tools, etc., would you recommend be sustained and/or scaled up? Please provide a justification for your response. 9) What strategies, interventions and tools would you recommend to be discontinued? Why? 10) What are some of the barriers, if any, that you encounter or have encountered in your involvement in this project? PROBE 11) How do you or did you overcome these barrier(s)? 12) In your own opinion what effect, if any, has the YYC program had on the target community or communities that you work with? PROBE - increased ethnic cohesion? Increased knowledge of their rights? Increased involvement in political matters? Objectivity in assessment and participation in community activities, ETC TNS RMS East Africa Limited TNS RMS Centre, Mpaka Road, Westlands, P.o Box 11505 00400, Nairobi. Telephone +254 20 4280000 Website - www.tns.com Prepared for use by TNS RMS staff only Annex iii: Baseline KII Guide | Page 125 13) What proposal, if any, would you recommend for use in future in such efforts such as these? PROBE BRIEFLY EXPOSE FINDINGS WITH STAKEHOLDER ON KEY ELEMENTS OF STUDY 14) E.g. on ethnicity, economic activity engagement, social engagement, social cohesion, etc Close interview and thank respondent for his/her time. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline KII Guide | Page 126 2.) Key Stakeholder Interview Guide – Parents, Church, Councilor, MP, Etc. Guide questions for key stakeholders in the YYC program, including MP’s Councilors, parents, local businessmen, etc to determine what they found to be the strengths and weaknesses of the initiative. Introduction - Key Components: • Thank you • Your name • Purpose • Confidentiality • Duration • How interview will be conducted • Opportunity for questions • Signature of consent I want to thank you for taking the time to meet with me today. My name is ______________________ and I would like to talk to you about your experiences participating in the Yes Youth Can (YYC) project. Specifically, as one of the components of our overall program evaluation we are assessing program effectiveness in order to capture lessons that can be used in future interventions. The interview should take less than an hour. I will be taping the session because I don’t want to miss any of your comments. Although I will be taking some notes during the session, I can’t possibly write fast enough to get it all down. Because we’re on tape, please be sure to speak up so that we don’t miss your comments. All responses will be kept confidential. This means that your interview responses will only be shared with research team members and we will ensure that any information we include in our report does not identify you as the respondent. Remember, you don’t have to talk about anything you don’t want to and you may end the interview at any time. Are there any questions about what I have just explained? Are you willing to participate in this interview? __________________ __________________ __________ Interviewee Witness Date Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline KII Guide | Page 127 To start with I would like to understand your understanding and opinion on young people – youth, in your area/family/constituency. Discussion guide questions 1) How would you describe the youth (majority) in your area/family/constituency? a. What kind of people are they, i.e. characteristics b. What do they do or engage in mostly? PROBE ACTIVITIES AND REASONS? c. What are some of their challenges – both on current activities or lack of economic activities to engage in? PROBE d. Is anything done by anyone or is being done by anyone to overcome or help them out of this situation? PROBE IF ENGAGED 2) How do the youth in your area/family [mention local treatment areas] earn their living? PROBE - what are their income generating activities? PROBE ON a. self employment vs. formal b. how they sustain these businesses, i.e. sources of capital – donor, loans, grants, etc c. For how long do most of them engage in these income generating activities? PROBE 3) Are you aware of the youth bunge? PROBE – a. What do you know about the bunges? Probe – objectives, membership, etc b. Do you have some in your area? Give me examples? c. When were these bunges formed? d. Who formed the group or groups? e. Do you know some of the members? 4) Role of bunges in their community - PROBE a. What do members of these bunges do in your community? b. Has the activities of these members been of any help to the community in your area? Probe c. Are their activities of any direct benefit to the community? Have they helped anything? Probe 5) Evaluating the community in which these bunges are located - PROBE a. Regarding the conflict that has been experienced in [mention treatment areas] what would you say could be the real causes and remedial measures for these? PROBE Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline KII Guide | Page 128 b. Regarding this community you work for / with or live in [local treatment area], have you seen any changes recently, whether positive or negative in the area of social, economic or politics in the lives of the youth? PROBE c. How would you describe the way people from the various ethnic groups here relate with each other? PROBE d. What is violence? PROBE – how would you describe violence e. Are these forms of violence that are acceptable to you? PROBE – which form and why do you think so? f. What are some of the manifestations of violence in your area? PROBE – are these inter ethnic, cultural, gender, income groups, etc? g. Which people were or are mostly behind these forms of violence? PROBE – politics, culture, etc h. How has these forms of violence affected your area? PROBE i. Regarding social cohesion, are the communities members in [mention treatment areas] much more united and relate well now as compared to some years back or? j. What are some of the factors that have contributed to these changes or impended changes/cohesion in your area? PROBE – social, economic and political changes. 6) Politics, social and economic activities a. How would you describe young people’s engagement with politics in your area? PROBE – how and why b. How would you describe young people’s engagement with socio-cultural activities in your area? PROBE c. And how would you describe your vision for the future regarding young people in this area? PROBE 7) EXPOSE TO FINDINGS FROM THE TREATMENT GROUPS IN THE AREA ON THESE KEY STUDY ELEMENTS AND SAY. SHARE AND AFTER AS THEM - What is your opinion on their views on I have spoken to a few young people in this area and based on their views I would like to share with you so that you can give me your opinion on their views, if you are interested. IF YES, SAY Regarding a. Economic opportunities and their involvement b. Political engagement and current situation in the area c. Social engagement (ethnic) in the community Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Baseline KII Guide | Page 129 d. Successes, challenges and failures of the bunge in the area and how these can be enhanced e. Their views on young people’s role in politics f. The future of young people in the area Thank you for your time. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline KII Guide | Page 130 H. ENDLINE KII GUIDE Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline KII Guide | Page 131 INDEPTH INTERVIEWS DISCUSSION GUIDE - PROJECT YYC! November 2013 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline KII Guide | Page 132 Types of Respondents In-depth interview respondents are illustrated in the table below and divided into two categories: YYC! program participants and implementer, and broader YYC! stakeholders. Each of the two categories will have a separate discussion guide. This sample will be drawn mainly from same areas that the research is taking place, although some respondents will only found in Nairobi. In some cases, appointments will be required prior to the interviews. In such cases these individuals will be identified in advance and contacted by telephone or email. The pool of respondents contacted will be large enough to allow for not show. Those respondents who are not known in advance, e.g. parents, local police, will be identified from the local community where the focus groups will be happening. Initial contact will be made in person and appointments will be set up after this initial contact. In some cases it will be possible to do interviews immediately. YYC participants and implementers # of respondents Bunge leaders, male 2 per province 12 Bunge leaders, female 2 per province 12 Members of county bunge 4 Members of national bunge 4 Implementing partner staff, key decision-makers 1 per province 6 Mobilizers 2 per province 12 USAID staff (to be discussed with USAID) 2 Broader YYC stakeholders # of respondents Religious Leaders 1 per province 6 Government officials: Councilors 2 per province 12 Government officials: Members of Parliament 2 Police 1 per province 6 Parents of participating youth 2 per province 12 Representatives of civil society organizations - local 1 per province 6 Representatives of civil society organizations - national organizations related to youth, non-violence, and/or democracy 4 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline KII Guide | Page 133 General Information and Consent Prior to all in-depth interviews, the following general information should be collected and consent statement read out loud to each respondent: General Information (complete before interview) 11. Agency/Organisation : ____________________________________ 12. Name of respondent: ___________________________________ 13. Type of respondent : _____________________________________ 14. Date of interview: ________________________________________ 15. Location of interview: _____________________________________ 16. Interviewer : ____________________________________________ 17. Note-taker (if any): ________________________________________ 18. Start time: _________ End time: ______________ Total duration of interview : ________________________________ (Total number of minutes) Interviewer Instructions: Depending on the type of respondent there may or may not have been an appointment prior to the meeting. In either case, it is very important that the respondent is aware of the amount of time required for the interview so that they don’t leave half way. In this case, please alert the respondent that you will need about 60 minutes of their time (make sure you stick to the duration you have promised). Note that, some respondents may have more time than others, so adjust the interview accordingly. INTRODUCTION AND CONSENT Hello and thank you for agreeing to talk with me. My name is [name of interviewer] and I represent TNS, a research organization based in Nairobi. Assisting me is [name] who will be taking notes during the meeting. We are visiting here today conducting a survey to better understand the lives of young people. This information is important to know as it will give us information on the role of youths in Kenyan society. My role here is to ask questions and listen, since I want to hear your opinions and experience. I also want to mention that there are no right or wrong answers, so I want to encourage you to be very honest and share with us any ideas that you might have. We are interested in both positive and negative experiences. We will be taping this interview so that we can focus on what you are telling us, review the tapes later, and not forget anything that was said. These tapes will not be released to anyone outside of our research group and they will be destroyed at the end of our study. Your identity will be kept confidential and we will ensure that it will not be possible for you to be identified by any information provided in our reporting. So please speak up for the recorder. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline KII Guide | Page 134 Your participation is completely voluntary and you can choose to not answer any question or stop participating at any time. However, I want to remind you that your participation is very important, your input will assist international organizations to make their Aid programs more efficient and tailored to the needs of our country. This interview will last approximately one hour. The information you give will be stored safely for the duration of the project and will be kept until at least 2015 for the purposes of preparing reports to the project sponsor. If you have any questions about the survey, you may contact XXX at TNS, at this phone number: XXXXXX. [START THE RECORDER TO GET VERBAL CONSENT] Do you agree to participate in today’s discussion? [IF YES, CONTINUE DISCUSSION] May we begin? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline KII Guide | Page 135 1.) YYC! Participant and Implementer In-Depth Interview Guide This guide should be used for bunge leaders, county and national bunge members, implementers, mobilizers, and USAID staff 1. First, please tell me about your role in YYC. When did you get involved? What kinds of things does your role entail? (5 min.) 2. Were there any challenges that you encountered in your role in YYC? If so, what were the two or three most important? Could anything have been done differently to make these challenges easier? (5 min.) 3. There are several different ways that YYC! Could have a positive impact on the lives of youth. Let’s talk about five of these: expanding economic opportunities, becoming more aware and involved in politics, becoming more involved in the community, reducing violence and helping understanding between people of different ethnicities, and empowering youths to feel more in control of their lives. a. In your view, has YYC! been successful in expanding the economic opportunities available to youths? Why or why not? Can you tell me about anything that you personally have seen or experienced that have formed your opinion about this? (5 min.) b. Has YYC! helped the youths who participated to become more aware and involved in politics? Why or why not? Can you tell me about anything that you personally have seen or experienced that have formed your opinion about this? (5 min.) c. Did YYC! help youths to become more involved in and accepted by the community? Why or why not? Can you tell me about anything that you personally have seen or experienced that have formed your opinion about this? (5 min.) d. Do you think YYC! had any impact in terms of promoting cooperation between people of different ethnicities in Kenya? Why or why not? What about reducing violence between different ethnic or political groups? Can you tell me about anything that you personally have seen or experienced that have formed your opinion about this? (5 min.) e. Do you think YYC! empowered the youths who participated to feel better about themselves and more in control of their lives? Why or why not? Can you tell me about anything that you personally have seen or experienced that have formed your opinion about this? (5 min.) f. We just discussed five ways that YYC! had a positive impact on youths. They were: expanding economic opportunities, becoming more aware and involved in politics, becoming more involved in the community, reducing violence and Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline KII Guide | Page 136 helping understanding between people of different ethnicities, and empowering youths to feel more in control of their lives. Is there anything you can think of that YYC could have done to be more successful at any of these five goals? (5 min.) g. Other than the issues we’ve just discussed, are there any other ways that YYC! has played a positive role in the lives of youth? (5 min.) h. Do you think female youths were able to participate in the same way and get the same benefits as male youths, or were there differences? Please explain. (5 min.) 4. In addition to people in your role, there were others involved in making YYC! happen as well. They included the mobilizers, bunge leaders, the implementing partners, and USAID. For each of these, can you tell me about whether you think they were successful in playing their role? Is there anything they should have done differently? (10 min.) 5. On the whole, when you think of YYC!, do you think it was more of a successful program, or more of an unsuccessful program? Why or why not? (5 min.) Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iii: Endline KII Guide | Page 137 2.) Broader YYC! Stakeholder In-Depth Interview Guide This guide should be used for the interviews of religious leaders, police, parents, government officials, and civil society members. 1. How did you hear about YYC? Please tell me about who you know of who is involved in the program, and what kinds of things they are doing with YYC? (5 min.) 2. In terms of the youths that you see regularly and who participated in the program, do you think participating in the program has made any difference in terms of: a. bringing benefits to the youths in their own lives? In what ways? (5 min.) b. how you see the youths and what your opinion of them is? Please explain (5 min.) c. your relationship with the youths? Please explain. (5 min.) 3. On the whole, when you think of YYC! do you think it was more of a successful program, or more of an unsuccessful program? Why or why not? (5 min.) Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 138 ANNEX IV. FULL SET OF DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS A. LEADER SURVEY – BASELINE AND ENDLINE Question: BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max AA.1 Has the bunge held any meetings in the past three months? endline only 569 86.6% AA.2 Is the bunge planning to meet again anytime in the future? endline only 76 73.7% AA.3 Has your bunge merged with another bunge within the last two years? endline only 549 21.1% AA.4 Is the name of your bunge still the same? endline only 549 98.2% AA.6 When was the current chairperson first elected? YEAR: endline only 547 2012 0.98 2006 2013 A1: Which activities does the bunge participate in? (may choose more than one) 566 549 Agriculture CROP FARMING 39.2% 42.8% TREE NURSERIES/ GREENHOUSES 16.4% 12.9% AGRO-FORESTRY/ PLANTING TREES 4.2% 1.8% AQUACULTURE/ FISHPONDS/ FISHING 5.3% 4.7% IRRIGATION SCHEME 0.5% 0.4% ORGANIC FARMING 0.7% 0.2% PROVIDING LABOR/ WORKERS FOR HIRE 0.9% 1.1% PROVIDING OR ACQUIRING FARMING EQUIP 0.0% 0.2% OTHER AGRICULTURE 2.7% 1.1% N=number of respondents answering the question. In questions where respondents must choose one answer from multiple response options, the number who chose each possible answer is given. If multiple responses were allowed for a question, only the % choosing each response (and not the N) is shown. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 139 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max Agribusiness/Food-Related Activity CROP SALES 7.2% 5.1% SEEDLING SALES 1.9% 1.5% FISH SALES/ FISH STORAGE 1.2% 2.0% ANIMAL BYPRODUCTS SALES 1.4% 1.8% FOOD PROCESSING 0.9% 1.1% OTHER FOOD-RELATED ACTIVITY 0.4% 0.0% OTHER AGRIBUSINESS ACTIVITY 3.0% 1.6% Animal Husbandry LIVESTOCK RAISING 29.3% 29.7% LIVESTOCK SALES 7.6% 7.5% ANIMAL BYPRODUCTS PRODUCTION 0.9% 1.5% MANURE PRODUCTION 0.0% 0.0% BEEKEEPING/ HONEY 2.7% 2.9% OTHER ANIMAL-RELATED ACTIVITIES 3.0% 1.1% Trade/Business Services MECHANIC/ VEHICLES/ TRANSPORT 1.9% 0.5% TABLE BANKING OR MERRY GO ROUND 25.8% 16.8% FORMAL ACCESS TO CREDIT 0.9% 0.4% INFORMAL INSURANCE 0.2% 0.0% ACCESS TO FORMAL INSURANCE 0.4% 0.0% ENTERTAINMENT/ TOURISM 3.2% 1.6% COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES 0.9% 1.1% HOSPITALITY 0.4% 0.5% RETAIL/ RETAIL SHOPS 1.4% 1.8% MANUFACTURING 1.1% 0.5% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 140 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max CONSTRUCTION 8.0% 4.2% RECYCLING 1.1% 1.3% OTHER BUSINESS, TRADE, SERVICE ACTIVITIES 5.7% 4.7% Community Awareness SOCIAL ACTIVITIES 5.1% 3.5% TRAININGS 6.7% 3.6% EDUCATION-RELATED ACTIVITIES 4.4% 2.0% COMMUNITY SUPPORT ACTIVITIES/SOCIAL WORK 3.3% ALL OTHER 3.0% 17.7% A2: If it had the chance, which other activities would the bunge participate in? 568 baseline only Agriculture CROP FARMING 10.2% 0.30 TREE NURSERIES/ GREENHOUSES 10.2% 0.30 AGRO-FORESTRY/ PLANTING TREES 3.4% 0.18 AQUACULTURE/ FISHPONDS/ FISHING 5.3% 0.22 IRRIGATION SCHEME 1.6% 0.13 ORGANIC FARMING 1.6% 0.13 PROVIDING LABOR/ WORKERS FOR HIRE 1.1% 0.10 PROVIDING OR ACQUIRING FARMING EQUIP 0.9% 0.09 OTHER AGRICULTURE 3.0% 0.17 Agribusiness/Food-Related Activity CROP SALES 5.8% 0.23 SEEDLING SALES 1.4% 0.12 FISH SALES/ FISH STORAGE 3.0% 0.17 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 141 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max ANIMAL BYPRODUCTS SALES 4.2% FOOD PROCESSING 1.4% OTHER FOOD-RELATED ACTIVITY 0.4% OTHER AGRIBUSINESS ACTIVITY 3.5% Animal Husbandry LIVESTOCK RAISING 24.6% LIVESTOCK SALES 10.9% ANIMAL BYPRODUCTS PRODUCTION 3.0% MANURE PRODUCTION 0.2% BEEKEEPING/ HONEY 2.8% OTHER ANIMAL-RELATED ACTIVITIES 2.5% Trade/Business Services MECHANIC/ VEHICLES/ TRANSPORT 3.7% TABLE BANKING OR MERRY GO ROUND 2.3% FORMAL ACCESS TO CREDIT 0.5% INFORMAL INSURANCE 0.2% ACCESS TO FORMAL INSURANCE 0.0% ENTERTAINMENT/ TOURISM 1.6% COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES 4.9% HOSPITALITY 1.4% RETAIL/ RETAIL SHOPS 3.7% MANUFACTURING 1.4% CONSTRUCTION 5.8% RECYCLING 1.6% OTHER BUSINESS, TRADE, SERVICE ACTIVITIES 2.5% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 142 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max Community Awareness SOCIAL ACTIVITIES 6.7% TRAININGS 6.0% EDUCATION-RELATED ACTIVITIES 5.1% COMMUNITY SUPPORT ACTIVITIES/SOCIAL WORK 6.7% ALL OTHER 10.2% A3.1: Of the activities you told me that the bunge participates in, which would you say is the most important focus of the bunge? [select 1] 566 546 Agriculture CROP FARMING 130 23.0% 152 27.8% TREE NURSERIES/ GREENHOUSES 46 8.1% 41 7.5% AGRO-FORESTRY/ PLANTING TREES 7 1.2% 2 0.4% AQUACULTURE/ FISHPONDS/ FISHING 17 3.0% 11 2.0% IRRIGATION SCHEME 2 0.4% 0 0.0% ORGANIC FARMING 1 0.2% 0 0.0% PROVIDING LABOR/ WORKERS FOR HIRE 0 0.0% 2 0.4% PROVIDING OR ACQUIRING FARMING EQUIP 0 0.0% 1 0.2% OTHER AGRICULTURE 6 1.1% 3 0.5% Agribusiness/Food-Related Activity CROP SALES 21 3.7% 9 1.6% SEEDLING SALES 2 0.4% 2 0.4% FISH SALES/ FISH STORAGE 1 0.2% 4 0.7% ANIMAL BYPRODUCTS SALES 6 1.1% 3 0.5% FOOD PROCESSING 1 0.2% 4 0.7% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 143 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max OTHER FOOD-RELATED ACTIVITY 1 0.2% 0 0.0% OTHER AGRIBUSINESS ACTIVITY 3 0.5% 5 0.9% Animal Husbandry LIVESTOCK RAISING 97 17.1% 97 17.8% LIVESTOCK SALES 30 5.3% 18 3.3% ANIMAL BYPRODUCTS PRODUCTION 1 0.2% 1 0.2% MANURE PRODUCTION 0 0.0% 0 0.0% BEEKEEPING/ HONEY 4 0.7% 5 0.9% OTHER ANIMAL-RELATED ACTIVITIES 11 1.9% 4 0.7% Trade/Business Services MECHANIC/ VEHICLES/ TRANSPORT 7 1.2% 2 0.4% TABLE BANKING OR MERRY GO ROUND 45 8.0% 45 8.2% FORMAL ACCESS TO CREDIT 4 0.7% 1 0.2% INFORMAL INSURANCE 0 0.0% 0 0.0% ACCESS TO FORMAL INSURANCE 0 0.0% 0 0.0% ENTERTAINMENT/ TOURISM 8 1.4% 2 0.4% COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES 3 0.5% 2 0.4% HOSPITALITY 1 0.2% 2 0.4% RETAIL/ RETAIL SHOPS 5 0.9% 3 0.5% MANUFACTURING 4 0.7% 1 0.2% CONSTRUCTION 26 4.6% 10 1.8% RECYCLING 4 0.7% 5 0.9% OTHER BUSINESS, TRADE, SERVICE ACTIVITIES 10 1.8% 13 2.4% Community Awareness SOCIAL ACTIVITIES 9 1.6% 6 1.1% TRAININGS 14 2.5% 8 1.5% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 144 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max EDUCATION-RELATED ACTIVITIES 8 1.4% 2 0.4% COMMUNITY SUPPORT ACTIVITIES/SOCIAL WORK 18 3.2% 5 0.9% ALL OTHER 13 2.3% 75 13.7% Total 566 100% 546 100% A3.2: Of the activities you told me that the bunge participates in, which would you say is the second most important focus of the bunge? [select 1] 401 288 Agriculture CROP FARMING 74 18.5% 70 24.3% TREE NURSERIES/ GREENHOUSES 29 7.2% 16 5.6% AGRO-FORESTRY/ PLANTING TREES 10 2.5% 6 2.1% AQUACULTURE/ FISHPONDS/ FISHING 8 2.0% 10 3.5% IRRIGATION SCHEME 1 0.2% 1 0.3% ORGANIC FARMING 2 0.5% 0 0.0% PROVIDING LABOR/ WORKERS FOR HIRE 4 1.0% 1 0.3% PROVIDING OR ACQUIRING FARMING EQUIP 0 0% 0 0.0% OTHER AGRICULTURE 6 1.5% 3 1.0% Agribusiness/Food-Related Activity CROP SALES 11 2.7% 10 3.5% SEEDLING SALES 3 0.7% 0 0.0% FISH SALES/ FISH STORAGE 3 0.7% 3 1.0% ANIMAL BYPRODUCTS SALES 1 0.2% 5 1.7% FOOD PROCESSING 3 0.7% 1 0.3% OTHER FOOD-RELATED ACTIVITY 1 0.2% 0 0.0% OTHER AGRIBUSINESS ACTIVITY 9 2.2% 0 0.0% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 145 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max Animal Husbandry LIVESTOCK RAISING 55 13.7% 51 17.7% LIVESTOCK SALES 8 2.0% 12 4.2% ANIMAL BYPRODUCTS PRODUCTION 1 0.2% 2 0.7% MANURE PRODUCTION 0 0% 0 0.0% BEEKEEPING/ HONEY 6 1.5% 5 1.7% OTHER ANIMAL-RELATED ACTIVITIES 1 0.2% 1 0.3% Trade/Business Services MECHANIC/ VEHICLES/ TRANSPORT 2 0.5% 0 0.0% TABLE BANKING OR MERRY GO ROUND 62 15.5% 26 9.0% FORMAL ACCESS TO CREDIT 0 0% 1 0.3% INFORMAL INSURANCE 0 0% 0 0.0% ACCESS TO FORMAL INSURANCE 1 0.2% 0 0.0% ENTERTAINMENT/ TOURISM 4 1.0% 2 0.7% COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES 1 0.2% 2 0.7% HOSPITALITY 0 0% 1 0.3% RETAIL/ RETAIL SHOPS 1 0.2% 3 1.0% MANUFACTURING 2 0.5% 2 0.7% CONSTRUCTION 15 3.7% 7 2.4% RECYCLING 1 0.2% 2 0.7% OTHER BUSINESS, TRADE, SERVICE ACTIVITIES 14 3.5% 7 2.4% Community Awareness SOCIAL ACTIVITIES 11 2.7% 4 1.4% TRAININGS 14 3.5% 5 1.7% EDUCATION-RELATED ACTIVITIES 10 2.5% 0 0.0% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 146 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max COMMUNITY SUPPORT ACTIVITIES/SOCIAL WORK 18 4.5% 4 1.4% ALL OTHER 9 2.2% 25 8.6% Total 401 100% 288 100% A3.3: Of the activities you told me that the bunge participates in, which would you say is the third most important focus of the bunge? [select 1] 215 123 Agriculture CROP FARMING 24 11.2% 11 8.9% TREE NURSERIES/ GREENHOUSES 18 8.4% 9 7.3% AGRO-FORESTRY/ PLANTING TREES 7 3.3% 2 1.6% AQUACULTURE/ FISHPONDS/ FISHING 5 2.3% 5 4.1% IRRIGATION SCHEME 0 0% 1 0.8% ORGANIC FARMING 1 0.5% 0 0.0% PROVIDING LABOR/ WORKERS FOR HIRE 1 0.5% 0 0.0% PROVIDING OR ACQUIRING FARMING EQUIP 0 0% 0 0.0% OTHER AGRICULTURE 2 0.9% 0 0.0% Agribusiness/Food-Related Activity CROP SALES 10 4.7% 5 4.1% SEEDLING SALES 4 1.9% 3 2.4% FISH SALES/ FISH STORAGE 2 0.9% 2 1.6% ANIMAL BYPRODUCTS SALES 0 0% 1 0.8% FOOD PROCESSING 1 0.5% 1 0.8% OTHER FOOD-RELATED ACTIVITY 0 0% 0 0.0% OTHER AGRIBUSINESS ACTIVITY 1 0.5% 3 2.4% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 147 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max Animal Husbandry LIVESTOCK RAISING 19 8.8% 14 11.4% LIVESTOCK SALES 5 2.3% 8 6.5% ANIMAL BYPRODUCTS PRODUCTION 3 1.4% 2 1.6% MANURE PRODUCTION 0 0% 0 0.0% BEEKEEPING/ HONEY 4 1.9% 5 4.1% OTHER ANIMAL-RELATED ACTIVITIES 3 1.4% 1 0.8% Trade/Business Services MECHANIC/ VEHICLES/ TRANSPORT 3 1.4% 0 0.0% TABLE BANKING OR MERRY GO ROUND 39 18.1% 16 13.0% FORMAL ACCESS TO CREDIT 1 0.5% 0 0.0% INFORMAL INSURANCE 0 0% 0 0.0% ACCESS TO FORMAL INSURANCE 0 0% 0 0.0% ENTERTAINMENT/ TOURISM 4 1.9% 3 2.4% COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES 0 0% 1 0.8% HOSPITALITY 0 0% 0 0.0% RETAIL/ RETAIL SHOPS 1 0.5% 2 1.6% MANUFACTURING 1 0.5% 0 0.0% CONSTRUCTION 7 3.3% 3 2.4% RECYCLING 1 0.5% 0 0.0% OTHER BUSINESS, TRADE, SERVICE ACTIVITIES 8 3.7% 5 4.1% Community Awareness SOCIAL ACTIVITIES 9 4.2% 2 1.6% TRAININGS 9 4.2% 2 1.6% EDUCATION-RELATED ACTIVITIES 7 3.3% 3 2.4% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 148 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max COMMUNITY SUPPORT ACTIVITIES/SOCIAL WORK 12 5.6% 5 4.1% ALL OTHER 3 1.4% 8 6.5% Total 215 100% 123 100% A4: When was the bunge formed? 569 2011 0.72 2003 2012 544 2011 1.04 2005 2013 A5.1: The bunge is registered 569 547 Yes 57 10.0% 517 94.5% No but we have applied 478 84.0% 20 3.7% No have not applied yet 34 6.0% 10 1.8% Total 569 100% 547 100 A5.2: When was the bunge registered? 477 2011 0.70 2003 2012 514 2011 0.92 2006 2013 A6.1: The bunge has a workplan 569 67.7% 547 81.0% A6.2: When was the workplan created? 382 2011 0.66 2005 2012 440 2012 1.00 2004 2013 A7.1: The bunge has a bank account 569 74.0% 549 86.0% A7.2: When was the bank account opened? 420 2012 0.81 2003 2012 470 2012 0.86 2006 2013 A8.1: The bunge has applied for funds from Tahidi Youth Fund 567 40.0% baseline only A8.2: When did you apply for funds? 225 2012 0.28 2011 2012 baseline only A9.1: The bunge has applied for funds from elsewhere 567 26.6% A10.1: The bunge has a gold, silver, or bronze ranking 486 53.9% baseline only A11: Someone from the bunge has attended a county forum 568 74.8% 548 67.2% A12: Someone from the bunge has been elected to the county or national bunge 567 13.8% 548 16.6% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 149 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max A12.2 Has any member of the bunge run for political office since the bunge was formed? 566 0.4% 547 8.2% A12.3 What political office : PRESIDENTIAL 566 3.0% 45 0.0% A12.3 What political office : SENATORIAL 566 29.3% 45 2.2% A12.3 What political office : COUNTY GOVERNOR 566 7.6% 45 4.4% A12.3 What political office : WOMEN REPRESENTATIVE 566 0.9% 45 6.7% A12.3 What political office : MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT 566 0.0% 45 6.7% A12.3 What political office : MEMBER OF COUNTY ASSEMBLY 566 2.7% 45 86.7% A12.3 What political office : Don't Know 566 3.0% 45 0.0% A12.3 What political office : Refused 566 1.9% 45 0.0% A13: The bunge has received trainings 568 44.7% 548 59.9% *see separate table for topics and # of days A14: How often does the bunge meet? (scale of 1-5) 568 2.1 1.01 1 5 546 2.37 1.14 1 5 A15: How often did the bunge used to meet during the first six months after creation? (scale of 1-5) 462 1.7 0.94 1 5 baseline only A16. Does your Bunge have annual meetings? 563 65.9% baseline only A16: When will the next annual meeting be held? 369 2012 0.36 2012 2013 baseline only A17: When will the next elections of bunge officials be held? 539 2012 0.70 2012 2017 baseline only A18: How many registered members total are currently in the bunge? 569 23.7 16.21 7 280 548 20.1 15.02 3 166 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 150 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max A19: What ethnicities are represented in your bunge? KIKUYU 569 22.0% 549 21.1% LUO 569 35.9% 549 37.3% LUHYA 569 31.8% 549 31.7% KAMBA 569 11.6% 549 11.7% MERU 569 2.5% 549 3.6% KISII 569 21.4% 549 18.8% KALENJIN 569 18.1% 549 19.9% MASAI 569 1.4% 549 1.6% MIJIKENDA 569 12.3% 549 14.6% TAITA 569 5.3% 549 7.1% SOMALI 569 2.6% 549 2.6% POKOT 569 5.5% 549 5.8% TURKANA 569 2.6% 549 3.1% BAJUNI 569 0.7% 549 0.9% KURIA 569 2.6% 549 2.2% TESO 569 3.7% 549 3.6% RENDILLE 569 0.0% 549 0.2% EMBU 569 0.7% 549 1.6% BORANA 569 1.1% 549 1.1% SAMBURU 569 0.5% 549 0.4% ARAB 569 0.5% 549 0.5% SWAHILI 569 2.8% 549 2.6% INDIAN 569 0.0% 549 0.2% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 151 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max KENYAN ONLY (DOESN’T THINK OF THEMSELVES IN THOSE TERMS) 569 1.6% 549 1.5% OTHER 569 4.6% 549 2.4% A20: What percentage of the members attend more than half of the meetings? 560 67.2% 536 63.9% A21: Since the bunge formed, have any members dropped out? (i.e. members who have stopped participating in any bunge activities and you don’t expect them to participate in the future) 567 41.8% 547 64.4% A21.a: How many members have dropped out since the bunge formed? Please give your best estimate. 237 6.0 0 49 345 7.8 0 185 A22: About what proportion of the youths in this village are part of the bunge? 551 53% 531 53% A23a: Does your bunge raise funds from Member dues? 568 85% 548 69% A23b: How much did the bunge raise from Member dues in the past 12 months? [Ksh] 459 12,027 20,110 0 1.73 million 348 16,853 30,275 0 2.4 million A23a: Does your bunge raise funds from Economic activities? 567 55.4% 548 58.2% A23b: How much did the bunge raise from Economic activities in the past 12 months? [units in Ksh] 300 18,790 37,688 0 480,000 306 37,157 111,143 0 1.728 million A23a: Does your bunge raise funds from Donors? 568 5.8% 547 14.4% A23b: How much did the bunge raise from Donors in the past 12 months? [units in Ksh] 30 34,267 45,850 0 240,000 77 51,689 69,947 0 600,000 A24: Before the bunge was formed, were the members already part of a group(s) (such as a self-help association, sports or drama club, a religious group, an NGO, etc)? 564 60.3% baseline only Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 152 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max A24.1a Has the bunge applied for funding from The Tahidi Youth fund grant? endline only 548 42.3% 0.50 A24.1b Did the bunge receive funding from The Tahidi Youth fund grant? endline only 231 26.4% 0.44 A24.1c How much money did the bunge receive from The Tahidi Youth fund grant in total? KSh Use Code -99 for Refused Use Code -98 for Don't Know endline only 61 40,632 8,415 40 80,000 What was the purpose of the funding? [check all that apply]: endline only A24.1d AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITY 61 75.4% A24.1d NON-AGRICULTURAL INCOME GENERATING ACTIVITY 61 4.9% A24.1d COMMUNITY SERVICE PROJECT 61 9.8% A24.1d SOCIAL/CULTURAL ACTIVITY 61 0.0% A24.1d OTHER (SPECIFY) 61 18.0% A24.3a Has the bunge applied for funding from Any other source? endline only 549 32.8% A24.3b Did the bunge receive funding from the Other source? endline only 179 25.7% A24.3c How much money did the bunge receive from the Other source? endline only 46 130,595 413,380 0 2.8 million A24.3d What was the purpose of the funding? [check all that apply] endline only A24.3d AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITY 46 56.5% A24.3d NON-AGRICULTURAL INCOME GENERATING ACTIVITY 46 10.9% A24.3d COMMUNITY SERVICE PROJECT 46 17.4% A24.3d SOCIAL/CULTURAL ACTIVITY 46 4.4% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 153 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max A24.3d OTHER (SPECIFY) 46 17.4% A25: Before the bunge was formed, how many of the members knew each other? (scale) 567 1.5 0.74 1 4 baseline only A26: How did the original members learn about YYC? 562 baseline only a mobilizer/field officer 392 69.8% baseline only From members of another bunge 127 22.6% Other 43 7.7% A25.1 Are any members part of a SACCO? endline only 540 40.2% A25.2 How many members of the bunge have joined the SACCO? Use Code -99 for Refused Use Code -98 for Don't Know endline only 217 6.8 1 125 A26.1 Did the bunge participate in the "My ID, My Life" Program? endline only 548 45.4% A26.2 How many people did the bunge help with obtaining an ID card? Use Code -99 for Refused Use Code -98 for Don't Know endline only 231 103 443.80 1 6,000 A27 Was any bunge member involved in the "Early warning, early response" program during the presidential elections this year? endline only 546 21.2% A27: How often does the mobilizer/field officer/youth development coordinator talk to you about YYC activities? (scale of 1-5) 500 3.7 1.29 1 5 542 3.78 1.06 1 5 A28: Are there organizations that provide funding, training, organize events, or facilitate employment opportunities etc that work with the youth in this area? 563 33.6% 538 27.1% A29: These organizations, are they NGOs? 188 68.6% 146 77.4% A29: These organizations, are they Government offices or ministries? 188 36.2% 146 32.2% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 154 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max A29: These organizations, are they Faith based Organizations? 188 14.4% 146 15.1% A29: These organizations, are they Financial institutions? 188 27.1% 146 2.7% A29: These organizations, are they Cooperatives? 188 5.9% 146 0.0% A30: In general, what activities do organizations do with the youth in this area?: baseline only Provide funding 187 29.4% Business skills training 187 52.4% Health awareness training 187 43.9% Leadership training 187 33.7% Networking opportunities with other NGOs 187 13.4% Organize events 187 23.5% Provide material inputs 187 18.7% Assist in finding employment opportunities 187 18.7% Scholarships 187 13.4% A31: In general, what activities do NGOs do with the youth in this area?: endline only Provide funding 113 23.9% Business skills training 113 50.4% Health awareness training 113 47.8% Leadership training 113 41.6% Networking opportunities with other NGOs 113 17.7% Organize events 113 27.4% Provide material inputs 113 21.2% Assist in finding employment opportunities 113 15.0% Scholarships 113 17.7% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 155 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max N Mean/ % Yes Std Dev Min Max A32:In general, what activities do Government offices or ministries do with the youth in this area? endline only Provide funding 47 36.2% Business skills training 47 59.6% Health awareness training 47 34.0% Leadership training 47 21.3% Networking opportunities with other NGOs 47 12.8% Organize events 47 14.9% Provide material inputs 47 21.3% Assist in finding employment opportunities 47 19.1% Scholarships 47 6.4% A33: In general, what activities do Religious Organizations do with the youth in this area? endline only Provide funding 22 27.3% Business skills training 22 31.8% Health awareness training 22 50.0% Leadership training 22 36.4% Networking opportunities with other NGOs 22 18.2% Organize events 22 36.4% Provide material inputs 22 9.1% Assist in finding employment opportunities 22 9.1% Scholarships 22 27.3% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 156 *Leader Descriptives, cont.: Leader Training Topics and Number of Days BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/% Yes N Mean/% Yes A13: The bunge has received trainings 568 44.7% (254) respondents) 548 59.9% (328 respondents) A13: Training 1: Number of Days 253 2.7 328 3.6 A13: Training 1 Topic 247 328 Economic Activity 98 39.7% 130 39.6% Finance and Money 30 12.1% 50 15.2% Leadership and Bunge Management 51 20.6% 53 16.2% Politics and Civic Education 28 11.3% 26 7.9% Health Issues 9 3.6% 18 5.5% Other 31 12.6% 51 15.5% Total: 247 100% 328 100% A13: Training 2: Number of Days 106 3.2 155 4.4 A13: Training 2 Topic 107 155 Economic Activity 28 26.2% 64 41.3% Finance and Money 15 14.0% 28 18.1% Leadership and Bunge Management 23 21.5% 23 14.8% Politics and Civic Education 12 11.2% 11 7.1% Health Issues 17 15.9% 7 4.5% Other 12 11.2% 22 14.2% Total: 107 100% 155 100% A13: Training 3: Number of Days 46 3.1 56 7.3 A13: Training 3 Topic 46 57 Economic Activity 10 21.7% 21 36.8% Finance and Money 6 13.0% 6 10.5% Leadership and Bunge Management 11 23.9% 7 12.3% Politics and Civic Education 11 23.9% 7 12.3% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 157 BASELINE ENDLINE N Mean/% Yes N Mean/% Yes Health Issues 3 6.5% 4 7.0% Other 5 10.9% 12 21.1% Total: 46 100% 57 100% A13: Training 4: Number of Days 14 2.6 14 4.4 A13: Training 4 Topic 13 14 Economic Activity 2 15.4% 0 0.0% Finance and Money 1 7.7% 5 35.7% Leadership and Bunge Management 4 30.8% 3 21.4% Politics and Civic Education 2 15.4% 3 21.4% Health Issues 0 0.0% 2 14.3% Other 4 30.8% 1 7.1% Total: 13 100% 14 100% A13: Training 5: Number of Days 5 39.2 5 8.8 A13: Training 5 Topic 5 5 Economic Activity 1 20.0% 0 0.0% Finance and Money 1 20.0% 1 20.0% Leadership and Bunge Management 0 0.0% 2 40.0% Politics and Civic Education 1 20.0% 0 0.0% Health Issues 1 20.0% 1 20.0% Other 1 20.0% 1 20.0% Total: 5 100% 5 100% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 158 B. YOUTH SURVEY – BASELINE AND ENDLINE Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max AA1: Do you plan on moving in the next 2 years? 4526 5.1% 1928 9.6% baseline only Year respondent joined bunge 4556 2011 0.457 2011 2012 baseline only A2:Reasons for joining the Bunge: (multiple responses allowed) 4520 baseline only I expected to get a lot of money 20.0% I wanted to be part of the activities organized by the bunge 47.5% I wanted to use my time with the Bunge members 20.6% I thought joining a group would be a good way of helping the members of my village 58.7% AA.1 In the summer of 2012, you indicated that you were a member of [bunge name]. Does this bunge still exist? endline only Yes 4,350 95.3% Yes but it has merged with another bunge 19 0.4% No 195 4.3% Total 4,564 100% AA.2 Do you still attend this bunge's meetings? endline only 4334 86.0% N=number of respondents answering the question. In questions where respondents must choose one answer from multiple response options, the number who chose each possible answer is given. If multiple responses were allowed for a question, only the % choosing each response (and not the N) is shown. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 159 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max AA.3 Which of the following most accurately describes the reason that you don't attend? endline only The bunge doesn't hold regular meetings 165 28.1% The bunge holds regular meetings but I have left 118 20.1% The bunge holds regular meetings and I am still a member but haven't been attending 305 51.9% Total 588 100% Can you please tell me how important each of these reasons is in explaining why this bunge isn’t meeting regularly, on a scale from 1-4, where 1=not important at all, 2=not important, 3=important, 4=very important endline only AA.4.a Members of the bunge had disagreements with each other and couldn’t get along 157 2.6 1.064 1 4 AA.4.b The leaders of the bunge did not do a good job 161 3.0 0.921 1 4 AA.4.c Bunge members joined hoping to get money from the program, but lost interest when they didn’t believe they would get money 157 3.0 0.905 1 4 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 160 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max AA.4.d Bunge members joined hoping to get some benefit other than money from the program, but lost interest when they weren’t getting that benefit 157 3.1 0.900 1 4 AA.4.e The mobilizer who originally organized the bunge didn’t stay involved to help the bunge keep going 156 3.0 0.838 1 4 AA.4.f The staff from the Implementing Partner weren’t helpful in keeping the bunge going 152 3.0 0.927 1 4 AA.4.g Bunge funds were mismanaged by the leadership 144 2.7 1.114 1 4 AA.4.h Other Reason 159 17.6% A1 Have you joined another bunge? endline only 773 2.2% A2. When did you join this bunge? YEAR 17 2012 0.970 2010 2013 A3: Do you have any leadership role within the Bunge? 4569 29.3% 3769 26.0% A3a: What's your role? president 277 20.7% 253 25.8% vice-president 154 11.5% 100 10.2% secretary 361 27.0% 289 29.5% treasurer/ accountant 324 24.3% 202 20.6% other 220 16.5% 135 13.8% Total 1,336 100% 979 100.0% A4: How regularly does your Bunge conduct its meetings? Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 161 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max Weekly 2302 50.6% 1,104 29.2% Every 2 wks. 2244 49.4% Less than weekly 1,147 30.3% Every month 1,290 34.1% Every other month 145 3.8% Less than every other month 97 2.6% Total 4,546 100% 3,783 100% A5: How often do you attend these meetings? 1 2 Frequently 3,448 75.5% Regularly 2,497 65.8% Sometimes 1,120 24.5% Sometimes 1,112 29.3% Rarely 168 4.4% Never 16 0.4% Total 4568 3,793 100% A6: Why don’t you attend meetings more regularly? I don’t feel welcomed 3 0.3% 23 1.8% I don’t think going to a meeting will be of help to me 15 1.3% 53 4.1% The time slotted for the meeting clashes with my plans 1011 90.5% 1,142 89.1% other 88 7.9% 64 5.0% Total 1117 100% 1282 100% How often have the following been discussed at bunge meetings ( on a scale from 1-4, where 1= frequently, 2 =sometimes, 3=only rarely & 4 =never) Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 162 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max A7.1 Politics 4542 2.965 1.042 1 4 3762 2.778 1.005 1 4 A7.2: Ethnic issues 4541 3.163 1.028 1 4 3762 2.879 1.029 1 4 A7.3: Issues that are important to women, such as gender based violence 4553 2.265 1.066 1 4 3765 2.145 0.922 1 4 A7.4: Starting or operating businesses 4551 1.315 0.635 1 4 3767 1.439 0.688 1 4 A7.5: Getting jobs 4557 1.546 0.843 1 4 3767 1.516 0.748 1 4 A7.6: Relationships between youth and others in the community 4559 1.637 0.790 1 4 3766 1.719 0.738 1 4 A8: Have others in the community who are not members of the bunge tried to interfere with what the bunge is doing? 4539 14.5% 3748 11.3% A9: Has this been a problem for the bunge? Yes a big problem 102 15.6% 61 14.4% Somewhat of a problem 198 30.2% 169 39.9% Not a problem 355 54.2% 194 45.8% Total 655 100% 424 100.0% A10: Does it ever happen that members of the bunge have problems that cause them to become angry with one another? Often 74 16.0% 120 32.0% Sometimes 809 17.9% 1308 35.0% Never or almost never 3641 80.5% 2310 61.8% Total 4524 100% 3738 100% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 163 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max A11 Did you attend the national Tuko Rada event? endline only 3738 9.2% A12 Did you see the national Tuko Rada event on television or listen to it on the radio? endline only 3406 34.3% A13/A14: Is it true that: Being part of the bunge has helped you to earn more money 4553 48.4% 3759 65.6% If True, how big of a difference(On scale from 1-3, where 1=a big difference and 3=only a small difference) 2201 1.567 0.644 1 3 2465 1.644 0.635 1 3 Being part of the bunge has brought people from different ethnicities closer together 4542 73.5% 3725 0.725 If True, how big of a difference(On scale from 1-3, where 1=a big difference and 3=only a small difference) 3334 1.418 0.598 1 3 2698 1.539 0.607 1 3 Being part of the bunge has helped you to have a voice in influencing the national government 4517 59.2% 3722 56.0% If True, how big of a difference(On scale from 1-3, where 1=a big difference and 3=only a small difference) 2671 1.59 0.664 1 3 2080 1.779 0.676 1 3 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 164 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max Being part of the bunge has helped you to have a voice in influencing the local government 4534 70.7% 3730 61.4% 0.487 If True, how big of a difference(On scale from 1-3, where 1=a big difference and 3=only a small difference) 3204 1.579 0.662 1 3 2291 1.776 0.674 1 3 Being part of the bunge has brought the members closer to the rest of the community 4554 91.2% 3752 85.6% 0.352 If True, how big of a difference(On scale from 1-3, where 1=a big difference and 3=only a small difference) 4146 1.324 0.543 1 3 3208 1.461 0.584 1 3 Being part of the bunge is a safe place where you can discuss issues that you wouldn’t be able to discuss anywhere else 4548 86.6% 3751 82.2% 0.382 If True, how big of a difference(On scale from 1-3, where 1=a big difference and 3=only a small difference) 3932 1.425 0.592 1 3 3077 1.533 0.631 1 3 A15: Did all of the members of the bunge have the opportunity to participate in choosing the bunge leaders 4526 93.0% 3766 92.4% 0.265 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 165 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max A16: Were any of the members of the bunge disappointed about who was chosen as a bunge leader? (1=yes, very much 2 somewhat, 3 not at all) 4493 2.869 0.387 1 3 3724 2.708 0.579 1 3 A17: In general, how good of a job do you think the bunge leaders are doing? (on a sacle from 1-5, where 1=excellent and 5=very poor) 4560 1.728 0.643 1 5 3765 1.846 0.711 1 5 Please tell me whether you strongly disagree, disagree, neither agree nor disagree, agree or strongly agree with the following statements., where 1=strongly disagree and 4= strongly agree: endline only A17.a It would have been helpful to the bunge if the mobilizer had been more involved than s/he did after the bunge was formed 4499 3.092 0.743 1 4 A17.b My bunge did not receive much guidance after the bunge was formed 4463 2.828 0.810 1 4 A17.c It would have been helpful to the bunge if the staff of the Implementing Partner had been more involved than they were in terms of providing advice and support 4470 3.116 0.748 1 4 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 166 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max A17.d The way YYC! gave out funding was fair and transparent 3997 2.595 0.968 1 4 A17.e The process for getting funding through YYC! was too complex 4041 2.808 0.882 1 4 A17.f The YYC! program should have offered more trainings to bunge members on income generating activities 4410 3.176 0.684 1 4 A17.g The YYC! program should have offered more trainings to bunge members on other topics such as leadership and organization 4448 3.179 0.670 1 4 A17.h In general, the trainings that YYC provided to bunge members were helpful 4231 3.043 0.734 1 4 A18 Do you know who the County Board members are who represent you? 4509 43.4% A19 Do you receive information from any of the following sources about the County Board or the National Youth Bunge Association: endline only 4567 Face to face from the county board members 35.8% Barazaa 13.9% SMS 26.0% Radio 8.3% Television 2.2% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 167 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max Facebook or internet 1.8% From the village bunge president 22.6% From unsaid partner or implementing partner 2.0% Church or other public gatherings 3.3% None of the above 20.3% Don't Know 3.0% Refused 0.5% A20 Which of these sources is the most important? endline only Face to face from the county board members 1,269 36.7% Barazaa 299 8.7% SMS 811 23.5% Radio 149 4.3% Television 16 0.5% Facebook or internet 29 0.8% From the village bunge president 802 23.2% From unsaid partner or implementing partner 26 0.8% Church or other public gatherings 54 1.6% Total 3455 100.0% A21 Would you like to receive more information about the activities of the County Board or the National Youth Bunge Association? endline only 4477 97.4% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 168 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max A22 Which of these sources would be the best way for you to receive more information? endline only Face to face from the county board members 2,040 46.8% Barazaa 246 5.6% SMS 1,326 30.4% Radio 123 2.8% Television 27 0.6% Facebook or internet 74 1.7% From the village bunge president 407 9.3% From unsaid partner or implementing partner 86 2.0% Church or other public gatherings 20 0.5% None of the above 8 0.2% Total 4357 100.0% A23 Are you currently a member of a SACCO that is specifically for bunge members? endline only 4533 16.6% A24 Is there a SACCO specifically for bunge members that you could join if you wanted to? endline only 3553 24.5% A25 Do you have savings in the SACCO? endline only 749 58.3% A25 Do you have savings in the SACCO? endline only 392 106177 50 2,000,000 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 169 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max A27 Have you received a loan from the SACCO? endline only 750 12.7% A28 How much did the SACCO lend to you? endline only 102 25859 37278 0 200,000 B1.1-B1.5 Did you: Grow crops, raise livestock, conduct business activities together with other members of the bunge or as part of bunge activities over the past 12 months 4559 75.3% 4544 60.3% Grow crops, raise livestock, conduct business activities together with other members of the bunge or as part of bunge activities over the past one month 3432 83.3% 2727 71.7% Work for someone who is not a member of your household for wages or a salary over the past 12 months 4565 35.5% 1964 33.4% 4556 34.3% 1879 35.8% Work for someone who is not a member of your household for wages or a salary over the past one month 1620 65.6% 656 59.5% 1564 73.3% 673 71.6% Grow crops on a plot owned or rented by you or your household over the past 12 months 4565 69.0% 1964 68.9% 4557 55.2% 1878 51.4% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 170 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max Grow crops on a plot owned or rented by you or your household over the past one month 3148 84.7% 1353 85.1% 2511 77.3% 964 76.3% Raise livestock owned by you or your household Over the past 12 months 4565 67.1% 1965 62.4% 4553 54.2% 1877 47.8% Raise livestock owned by you or your household Over the past one month 3061 94.9% 1227 96.7% 2469 93.4% 897 91.1% Conduct business activities for yourself or your household Over the past 12 months 4565 41.7% 1963 26.4% 4559 39.8% 1880 27.7% Conduct business activities for yourself or your household Over the past one month 1902 85.4% 517 81.6% 1813 86.0% 519 82.5% Earn money from Growing crops on a field you worked with other bunge members Over the past 12 months 3424 30.0% 2736 44.1% Earn money from Growing crops on a field you worked with other bunge members Over the past one month 1026 45.5% 1201 41.0% Earn money from Livestock and other animal activities with other bunge members Over the past 12 months 3429 13.7% 2731 22.9% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 171 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max Earn money from Livestock and other animal activities with other bunge members Over the past one month 469 42.6% 626 42.5% Earn money from Business activities with other bunge members Over the past 12 months 3422 18.7% 2737 19.9% Earn money from Business activities with other bunge members Over the past one month 636 57.1% 1206 49.1% B2_4: Which crops did you grow with other bunge members? 1002 1209 MANAGU 2.3% 4.2% MAIZE 27.0% 33.6% WHEAT 0.4% 1.2% SORGHUM 1.2% 0.6% POTATOES 2.8% 3.2% SWEET POTATO 1.4% 2.0% YAMS 0.6% 0.1% GROUNDNUT 3.0% 4.5% CASHEW NUT 0.2% 0.0% PEANUT 0.0% 0.1% BEANS OF ALL KINDS 8.9% 12.2% LENTILS 0.5% 0.2% PEAS 0.6% 0.3% PIGEON PEA 0.2% 0.3% COWPEA 2.5% 3.5% CHICKPEA 0.1% 0.0% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 172 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max CARROTS 2.6% 1.5% TOMATOES 14.0% 14.5% CABBAGE 6.4% 6.1% SPINACH 1.4% 1.6% LETTUCE 0.1% 0.0% PEPPERS 0.7% 1.4% PUMPKIN 0.2% 0.0% CUCUMBERS 0.2% 0.1% ONIONS 4.3% 4.0% MELON 0.8% 1.9% ORANGES 0.1% 0.1% LEMON 0.0% 0.2% CASSAVA 1.5% 3.3% ARROW ROOT 0.2% 0.1% SUGAR CANE 8.0% 8.1% MILLET 1.7% 1.2% KALE 31.0% 24.5% OTHER 36.4% 26.1% Over the past 12 months, Did you raise the following with other members of the bunge 469 626 CATTLE 15.4% 12.3% SHEEP 4.1% 4.8% GOATS 10.3% 14.1% Poultry 68.5% 65.8% PIGS 6.0% 8.2% FISH 9.4% 8.2% OTHER 3.4% 5.6% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 173 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max B2_9: What kind of business activities did you do with other members of the bunge? 607 544 FARMING/LIVESTOCK 22.7% 30.7% FISHING 4.0% 4.8% TRADING/SALES 30.1% 23.3% JUA KALI 7.6% 4.4% TRANSPORT 3.1% 1.3% CONSTRUCTION 4.1% 2.9% EDUCATION 1.8% 0.9% HEALTH 5.9% 1.1% CLERICAL 0.0% 0.2% FACTORY WORKER 0.2% 0.0% RESTAURANT/BAR/ HOTEL/HOSPITALITY 2.0% 1.3% OTHER SERVICE INDUSTRY 5.1% 2.9% ENTERTAINMENT 2.3% 2.2% OTHER 24.4% 32.9% On a scale from 1-5 (1 - 4 for baseline) where 4 Yes, often 3 Yes, several times 2 Yes, once or twice 1 No, would never do this 0 No, but would do it if had the chance, have you personally: Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 174 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max C1_1: Discussed politics with friends or neighbors during the past year and If not, would you do this if you had the chance? 4554 2.9 1.342 1 5 1966 2.831 1.350 1 5 4544 2.28 1.067 0 4 1870 2.292 1.087 0 4 C1_2: Attended a community barazas - other than bunge meeting during the past year, and If not, would you do this if you had the chance? 4561 3.1 1.217 1 5 1964 2.665 1.180 1 5 4549 2.29 1.157 0 4 1873 1.98 1.193 0 4 C1_3: Got together with others to raise an issue during the past year, and If not, would you do this if you had the chance? 4561 2.7 1.174 1 5 1962 2.363 1.071 1 5 4544 1.84 1.237 0 4 1870 1.575 1.264 0 4 C1_4: Attended a demonstration or protest march during the past year, and If not, would you do this if you had the chance? 4561 1.5 0.772 1 5 1965 1.45 0.749 1 5 4546 1.16 0.799 0 4 1868 1.079 0.825 0 4 C1_5: Used force or violence for a political cause during the past year. and If not, would you do this if you had the chance? 4557 1.1 0.359 1 5 1963 1.105 0.390 1 5 4549 1.2 0.645 0 4 1864 1.139 0.676 0 4 On a scale from 1-4, where 1=strongly agree and 4=strongly disagree, do you agree or disagree with the following statements? C2_1: Politics and government sometimes seem so complicated that you can’t really understand what’s going on. 4517 1.7 0.744 1 4 1922 1.742 0.757 1 4 4508 1.9 0.735 1 4 1854 1.948 0.709 1 4 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 175 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max C2_2: As far as politics are concerned, friends and neighbors do not take my opinion seriously 4379 2.3 0.841 1 4 1853 2.361 0.856 1 4 4394 2.4 0.757 1 4 1815 2.34 0.771 1 4 C2_3: If you had to, you would be able to join with others to make elected representatives listen 4538 1.7 0.690 1 4 1952 1.716 0.692 1 4 4519 2.0 0.723 1 4 1859 1.941 0.721 1 4 C2_4:The new devolved government is working with our bunge because we are organized endline only 4335 2.5 0.824 1 4 On a scale from 1-4, where 1=often and 4=never, during the past year, how often have you contacted the following to help solve a problem or to give them your views?: C3_1: A Local Government councilor to help solve a problem or to give them your views? 4557 3.4 0.934 1 4 1961 3.599 0.789 1 4 4545 3.3 0.961 1 4 1871 3.37 0.904 1 4 C3_2: A District Commissioner 4546 3.8 0.541 1 4 1961 3.871 0.451 1 4 4539 3.7 0.682 1 4 1866 3.708 0.627 1 4 C3_3: A Member of Parliament 4558 3.8 0.615 1 4 1958 3.864 0.488 1 4 4547 3.7 0.694 1 4 1867 3.719 0.663 1 4 C3_4: An official of a government ministry 4554 3.8 0.621 1 4 1962 3.864 0.475 1 4 4553 3.6 0.758 1 4 1871 3.669 0.699 1 4 C3_5: A political party official 4552 3.8 0.592 1 4 1961 3.877 0.467 1 4 4548 3.7 0.692 1 4 1870 3.765 0.609 1 4 C3_6: A religious leader 4555 2.8 1.224 1 4 1963 3.045 1.163 1 4 4548 2.9 1.152 1 4 1867 3.055 1.103 1 4 C3_7: Local elders 4551 3.0 1.143 1 4 1963 3.35 1.008 1 4 4546 3.1 1.042 1 4 1870 3.305 0.953 1 4 C3_8: Community￾Owned Resource Person 4549 3.6 0.843 1 4 1960 3.76 0.648 1 4 4544 3.5 0.856 1 4 1868 3.601 0.770 1 4 C3_9: Retirees 4553 3.7 0.730 1 4 1959 3.787 0.619 1 4 4540 3.6 0.776 1 4 1867 3.686 0.675 1 4 C3_10: Opinion leaders 4540 3.8 0.658 1 4 1963 3.862 0.496 1 4 4540 3.6 0.753 1 4 1869 3.723 0.654 1 4 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 176 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max C3_11: Other influential people 4540 3.6 0.783 1 4 1960 3.724 0.709 1 4 4537 3.6 0.830 1 4 1863 3.603 0.807 1 4 C4: When there are problems with how local government is run in your community, how much can an ordinary person do to improve the situation? (on a scale from 1-3, where 1=a lot, and 3=nothing) 4489 2.1 0.681 1 3 1894 2.183 0.709 1 3 4484 2.1 0.660 1 3 1830 2.268 0.647 1 3 C5: How easy or difficult is it for an ordinary person to have his voice heard when elections are not happening? (on a scale from 1-4, where 1=very easy and 4=very difficult) 4525 3.3 0.934 1 4 1936 3.321 0.922 1 4 4520 3.1 0.867 1 4 1857 3.023 0.896 1 4 C6: Do you believe the following are taking into account your interests and the interests of other young people in Kenya when making decisions? (on a scale from 1-4, where 1=yes, a lot and 4=not at all) C6_1: Any of the political parties 4510 3.2 0.942 1 4 1941 3.295 0.881 1 4 4508 3.0 0.927 1 4 1842 2.936 0.897 1 4 C6_2: Parliament 4502 3.0 0.976 1 4 1927 3.225 0.903 1 4 4498 3.0 0.920 1 4 1841 3.021 0.897 1 4 C6_3: Local councilors 4534 3.1 0.939 1 4 1935 3.245 0.861 1 4 4515 3.0 0.897 1 4 1846 3.003 0.868 1 4 C6_4:District-level government 4510 3.2 0.922 1 4 1907 3.269 0.866 1 4 4482 3.1 0.890 1 4 1828 3.02 0.897 1 4 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 177 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max C7: For people like you, do you think things in Kenya will get better or worse in the years to come? (on a scale of 1-5, where 1= a lot better and 5=a lot worse) 4421 2.3 1.238 1 5 1856 2.548 1.342 1 5 4435 2.8 1.320 1 5 1826 2.802 1.217 1 5 C8: With regard to the most recent national elections, which statement is true for you? choices of 1-8, where 1=voted and 2-8 are various reasons for not voting) 4564 2.6 2.600 1 8 1964 3.66 2.874 1 8 4554 1.3 1.145 1 8 1873 1.59 1.634 1 8 C9: Are you planning to vote in the next election? No 153 3.4% 155 8.0% Yes 4,178 92.5% 1582 82.1% Maybe 187 4.1% 190 9.9% Total 4,518 100% 1927 100% D1: Are you a member of A drama, music, or dance club? 4564 18.9% 1962 17.9% 4555 11.0% 1871 10.8% D2: If so, have you ever taken a leadership role in the drama, music, or dance club? 861 38.1% 352 33.8% 499 39.9% 201 31.3% D1: Are you a member of A farmers group or cooperative? 4561 23.6% 1963 14.6% 4554 15.7% 1865 9.0% D2: If so, have you ever taken a leadership role in the farmers group or cooperative? 1076 21.8% 287 22.0% 715 25.7% 167 26.9% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 178 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max D1: Are you a member of A religious group (church/mosque, prayer or bible study group)? 4565 64.4% 1962 59.6% 4555 66.6% 1872 61.9% D2: If so, have you ever taken a leadership role in the religious group (church/mosque, prayer or bible study group)? 2938 38.2% 1170 27.6% 3030 33.7% 1158 26.9% D1: Are you a member of A self-help group? 4562 42.5% 1963 18.9% 4547 41.4% 1865 24.5% D2: If so, have you ever taken a leadership role in the self-help group? 1938 39.9% 371 39.9% 1881 34.3% 455 33.6% D1: Are you a member of A school committee or school club? 4564 11.9% 1964 9.2% 4554 11.4% 1869 7.8% D2: If so, have you ever taken a leadership role in the school committee or school club? 544 48.9% 181 52.5% 518 40.9% 146 34.2% D1: Are you a member of A sports team? 4565 22.0% 1962 25.8% 4545 14.0% 1867 12.1% D2: If so, have you ever taken a leadership role in the sports team? 1006 40.9% 507 34.9% 634 41.5% 225 36.0% D1: Are you a member of A Non Government organization (as a volunteer)? 4561 8.4% 1962 3.6% 4554 6.8% 1867 3.2% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 179 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max D2: If so, have you ever taken a leadership role in the Non Government organization (as a volunteer)? 384 36.2% 71 36.6% 307 36.2% 59 20.3% D1: Are you a member of A group that mobilizes the community for meetings? 4566 18.7% 1964 5.9% 4552 13.9% 1872 5.2% D2: If so, have you ever taken a leadership role in the group that mobilizes the community for meetings? 855 37.7% 115 41.7% 635 43.9% 98 43.9% D1: Are you a member of A special interest group (physically disabled, community in arid areas)? 4559 3.9% 1963 1.6% 4554 4.0% 1869 2.4% D2: If so, have you ever taken a leadership role in the special interest group (physically disabled, community in arid areas)? 176 47.7% 33 27.3% 180 27.8% 44 13.6% D1: Are you a member of A pressure group (e.g. political activism groups)? 4554 3.8% 1961 1.5% 4546 1.7% 1862 1.1% D2: If so, have you ever taken a leadership role in the pressure group (e.g. political activism groups)? 172 41.9% 29 37.9% 78 41.0% 20 30.0% D1: Are you a member of another group? 4556 3.7% 1959 1.5% 4533 2.7% 1864 1.7% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 180 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max D2: If so, have you ever taken a leadership role in the Other? 170 52.9% 0.501 29 41.4% 0.501 123 54.5% 31 48.4% D3: If someone was to be faced with a dreadful situation, for instance serious illness, how likely is it that people from the village will come together to help him? (on a scale where 1=very likely and 4=completely unlikely) 4554 1.492 0.722 1 4 1949 1.62 0.861 1 4 4548 1.623 1864 1.764 0.750 1 4 D4_1: If you suddenly needed to borrow a small amount of money, enough to pay for expenses for your household for one week: Are there people beyond your immediate family and close relatives who would be willing to help you? 4535 71.8% 1942 0.634 4511 75.7% 1838 69.9% D4_2: If you suddenly needed to borrow a small amount of money, enough to pay for expenses for your household for one week: Are there people outside of your ethnic group who would help you? 4398 54.7% 0.498 1839 43.1% 4413 60.0% 1784 53.1% 0.499 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 181 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max D5: In general, do you agree or disagree with this statement: Most people who live in this village can be trusted (on a scale of 1-4, where 1=strongly agree and 4=strongly disagree) 4546 1.922 0.823 1 4 1943 2.036 0.868 1 4 4540 1.981 1860 2.111 0.785 1 4 D6: If there were a problem that affected the entire village/neighborhood, who do you think would work together to deal with the situation? 4553 1969 baseline onlly Each person/household would deal with the problem individually 537 11.8% 406 20.8% People would work with others of the same ethnic group only 184 4.0% 65 3.3% The whole community would work together 3832 84.2% 1,483 75.9% E2: L What is your ethnicity? Kikuyu 539 11.8% 159 8.1% 8.1 440 9.6% 123 6.6% Luo 998 21.9% 538 27.4% 27.4 1051 23.0% 571 30.5% Luhya 513 11.2% 253 12.9% 12.9 508 11.1% 175 9.3% Kamba 94 2.1% 82 4.2% 4.2 79 1.7% 76 4.1% Meru 5 0.1% 2 0.1% 0.1 4 0.1% 6 0.3% Kisii 518 11.3% 56 2.8% 2.8 606 13.3% 56 3.0% Kalenjin 510 11.2% 308 15.7% 15.7 525 11.5% 330 17.6% Masai 2 0.0% 14 0.7% 0.7 1 0.0% 11 0.6% Mijikenda 522 11.4% 267 13.6% 13.6 536 11.8% 286 15.3% Taita 150 3.3% 46 2.3% 2.3 167 3.7% 43 2.3% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 182 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max Pokot 139 3.0% 15 0.8% 0.8 162 3.6% 16 0.9% Turkana 6 0.1% 20 1.0% 1 7 0.2% 16 0.9% Bajuni 11 0.2% 22 1.1% 1.1 Kuria 71 1.6% 44 2.2% 2.2 90 2.0% 49 2.6% Teso 51 1.1% 2 0.1% 0.1 39 0.9% 1 0.1% Embu 0.0% 3 0.2% 0.2 0 0.0% 1 0.1% Swahili 7 0.2% 6 0.3% 0.3 30 0.7% 3 0.2% Kenyan only (doesn’t think of self in those terms) 276 6.0% 76 3.9% 3.9 235 5.2% 72 3.8% Indian 4 0.1% 1 0.1% 0.1 Pokomo 21 0.5% 6 0.3% 0.3 Taveta 27 0.6% 14 0.7% 0.7 Borana 17 0.4% 0.0% 10 0.2% 9 0.5% Other 69 1.5% 32 1.6% 1.6 Total 4550 100.0% 0 1966 100.0% 100.1 4490 100.0% 1844 100.0% E3: Let us suppose that you had to choose between being a Kenyan and being (your ethnicity). Which of the following statements best expresses your feelings? *too many responses to list; data available upon request E4: In general, do you think are more trustworthy, less trustworthy, or about the same, compared to other Kenyans? (on a scale from 1-5, where 1=) 4263 2.425 0.850 1 5 1852 2.484 0.814 1 5 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 183 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max E5: How regularly do serious conflicts arise between (on a scale from 1 to 4 , where 1=never and 4=often) E5_1: people Within your own family? 4559 1.925 0.829 1 4 1959 1.926 0.825 1 4 4543 1.772 0.719 1 4 1871 1.851 0.722 1 4 E5_2: people in the community you live with? 4548 2.156 0.833 1 4 1950 2.191 0.853 1 4 4533 2.052 0.754 1 4 1871 2.076 0.727 1 4 E5_3: people of different tribes? 4350 2.213 0.917 1 4 1882 2.198 0.973 1 4 baseline only E6: To whom would you turn for help to resolve a violent conflict between different groups in this country?: 4525 1948 baseline only nobody 2% 3.0% people involved in the conflict 12% 12.1% family/friends/neighbors 10% 11.3% local chiefs/elders or peace makers 60% 61.8% court of elders 5% 5.8% local courts 5% 4.7% Local leadership 12% 12.1% religious leaders 11% 10.5% non-governmental bodies 2% 2.3% militia groups 1% 0.5% military or police 20% 24.2% Other government agencies 5% 4.7% national court 3% 2.5% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 184 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max there is never a solution to this conflicts 0% 1.0% E7: During campaigns for the next elections, to what extent are you scared that you may be a victim in the conflict or will be threated because of the politics? 4487 3.029 1.115 1 4 1931 3.106 1.097 1 4 baseline only E8: After the elections in 2007, many people were angry and some became violent. Do you think some of the people who were violent were justified in what they did? 4444 2.742 0.574 1 3 1923 2.78 0.521 1 3 baseline only E9: Sometimes people in politics will try to recruit people or pay them to cause chaos after an election. Is this a thing that you would consider doing? 1 Yes, I would consider it 2 I might consider it 3 I probably would not consider it 4 I definitely would not consider it 4553 3.853 0.482 1 4 1960 3.856 0.470 1 4 baseline only Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 185 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max How you think people should react in the following situations. 1 Fight it out physically/ beat him or her up 2 Abuse him/her verbally 3 Report to the local authorities (Chief/Police) 4 Seek resolution from others (neighbours /relatives/religious leaders) 5 Discuss with the other person 6 Do nothing E10: If a person insulted his/her neighbor, how should the neighbor react? 4561 3.963 0.962 1 6 1958 3.912 0.976 1 6 baseline only E11: If a man was caught stealing from one of your neighbors, How should the neighbor react? 4564 3.233 0.759 1 6 1964 3.144 0.775 1 6 baseline only E12: If a man’s wife were to burn his supper, how should the man react? 4539 4.691 0.949 1 6 1949 4.694 0.984 1 6 baseline only E13: If a man’s wife were to argue with him or talk back, how should the man react? 4539 4.456 1.013 1 6 1946 4.376 1.025 1 6 baseline only E14: In the last 6 months, how many times have you been in a physical fight with another person? 4046 0.191 2.012 0 94 1726 0.276 1.989 0 32 baseline only Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 186 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max How true do you think it is (on a scale from 1- 4, where 1=not at all true and 4=exactly true) F1: you can always manage to solve your problems if you try hard enough 4553 3.214 0.730 1 4 1958 3.188 0.743 1 4 4549 3.039 0.765 1 4 1869 2.954 0.808 1 4 F2: If someone opposes you, you can find the means and ways to get what you want 4538 2.974 0.840 1 4 1952 3.014 0.827 1 4 4533 3.023 0.784 1 4 1863 3.001 0.834 1 4 F3: you are certain you can accomplish your goals 4538 3.425 0.700 1 4 1945 3.402 0.724 1 4 4531 3.318 0.720 1 4 1854 3.216 0.766 1 4 F4: you are confident that you could deal effectively with unexpected events 4522 3.006 0.821 1 4 1951 2.941 0.855 1 4 4525 2.996 0.757 1 4 1859 2.887 0.826 1 4 F5: Thanks to your resourcefulness, you can handle unforeseen situations 4519 3.01 0.827 1 4 1949 2.915 0.868 1 4 4527 3.009 0.780 1 4 1855 2.896 0.851 1 4 F6: you can solve most problems if you invest the necessary effort 4529 3.334 0.720 1 4 1954 3.291 0.754 1 4 4535 3.273 0.730 1 4 1859 3.165 0.797 1 4 F7: you can remain calm when facing difficulties because you can rely on your strength to cope 4549 3.136 0.816 1 4 1955 3.145 0.817 1 4 4543 2.993 0.785 1 4 1866 2.859 0.839 1 4 F8: When you are faced with a problem, you always look for alternative solution. 4542 3.343 0.715 1 4 1957 3.334 0.730 1 4 4545 3.276 0.705 1 4 1865 3.162 0.787 1 4 F9: If you are in trouble, you can think of a good solution 4540 3.451 0.674 1 4 1953 3.402 0.702 1 4 4531 3.394 0.684 1 4 1857 3.286 0.755 1 4 F10: you can handle whatever comes your way 4526 3.175 0.787 1 4 1945 3.13 0.810 1 4 4530 3.135 0.755 1 4 1855 3.003 0.827 1 4 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 187 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max For each of the following, please tell me how often you act this way: (where 1=often and 4=never) F11: Do you play games, sports, or go dancing with your friends? 4562 2.75 1.181 1 4 1964 2.649 1.152 1 4 baseline only F12: Do you destroy things that belong to others? 4549 3.924 0.366 1 4 1964 3.879 0.472 1 4 baseline only F13: Do you enjoy doing things and talking with peers? 4560 1.512 0.760 1 4 1966 1.62 0.764 1 4 baseline only F14: Do you help the elders? 4560 1.537 0.647 1 4 1962 1.627 0.702 1 4 baseline only F15: Do you feel sympathy for others? 4560 1.404 0.577 1 4 1961 1.494 0.648 1 4 baseline only F16: Are you quarrelsome? 4553 3.695 0.676 1 4 1957 3.707 0.657 1 4 baseline only F17: Do you lie or behave in a dishonest way? 4551 3.752 0.603 1 4 1955 3.701 0.660 1 4 baseline only F18: Do you take things from other places without permission? 4545 3.905 0.421 1 4 1961 3.855 0.513 1 4 baseline only F19: Do you disobey your parents/guardians, teachers or elders? 4550 3.816 0.593 1 4 1961 3.771 0.633 1 4 baseline only F20: Do you enjoy participating in activities in the community? 4564 1.482 0.699 1 4 1962 1.668 0.795 1 4 baseline only F21: Do you have love for your peers? 4563 1.332 0.555 1 4 1962 1.434 0.631 1 4 baseline only F22: Do you share with others? 4557 1.472 0.624 1 4 1962 1.595 0.659 1 4 baseline only F23: Do you curse or use abusive language? 4550 3.874 0.461 1 4 1964 3.837 0.521 1 4 baseline only Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 188 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max F24: Do you help younger ones? 4559 1.393 0.578 1 4 1965 1.507 0.649 1 4 baseline only F25: Do you threaten to hurt others? 4556 3.871 0.494 1 4 1965 3.815 0.576 1 4 baseline only F26: Do you share your feelings or ideas with your friends? 4559 1.635 0.685 1 4 1966 1.832 0.772 1 4 baseline only F27: Do you have confidence to be responsible for others? 4556 1.538 0.660 1 4 1952 1.666 0.701 1 4 baseline only F28: Do other youth like associating with you? 4551 1.368 0.581 1 4 1955 1.479 0.665 1 4 baseline only G1: How old are you currently? 4562 27.2 6.032 18 72 1964 25.1 4.825 18 36 4460 28.2 6.227 18 100 1763 26.2 5.130 18 100 G2: What is the highest level of education you have completed? No Formal Schooling 93 2.0% 48 2.4% 24 0.5% 3 0.2% Informal Schooling Only (Including Koranic Schooling) 18 0.4% 4 0.2% 35 0.8% 32 1.7% Some Primary Schooling 740 16.2% 377 19.2% 407 9.0% 98 5.3% Primary School Completed 1198 26.2% 474 24.1% 1129 25.0% 439 23.7% Some Secondary School / High School 739 16.2% 381 19.4% 733 16.2% 369 20.0% Secondary School / High School Completed 1224 26.8% 488 24.9% 1345 29.8% 642 34.7% Post-Secondary Qualifications, Other Than University E.G. A 463 10.1% 157 8.0% 699 15.5% 217 11.7% Some University 43 0.9% 20 1.0% 78 1.7% 32 1.7% University Completed 40 0.9% 10 0.5% 51 1.1% 13 0.7% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 189 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max Post-Graduate 8 0.2% 4 0.2% 10 0.2% 4 0.2% Total 4566 100% 1959 100% 4511 100% 1849 100% G3: What is your religion, if any? No Religion 59 1.3% 47 2.4% 43 0.9% 24 1.3% Christian 4151 91.0% 1,784 90.9% 4181 91.8% 1726 92.3% Muslim 337 7.4% 124 6.3% 327 7.2% 119 6.4% Other 16 0.4% 7 0.4% 5 0.1% 0.0% Total 4563 100% 1962 100% 4556 100% 1869 100.0% G4: Which best describes your living situation? I live in my parents house 1355 30% 842 42.9% 799 17.5% 489 26.1% I live in the house of other relatives 101 2% 83 4.2% 92 2.0% 57 3.0% I rent a room in someone else’s house 124 3% 53 2.7% 91 2.0% 42 2.2% I rent a house 382 8% 132 6.7% 666 14.6% 298 15.9% I live in my own house 2602 57% 853 43.5% 2905 63.8% 985 52.6% Total 4564 100% 1963 100% 4553 99.9% 1871 100% G6: Who would you say is the main income earner in your household? Myself 2169 47.6% 748 38.1% 2570 56.4% 1012 54.1% My Spouse 1154 25.3% 366 18.6% 1272 27.9% 364 19.5% A Parent 1123 24.6% 764 38.9% 657 14.4% 452 24.2% Another Relative 98 2.1% 71 3.6% 40 0.9% 33 1.8% Other 16 0.4% 14 0.7% 17 0.4% 8 0.4% Total 4560 100% 1963 100% 4556 100% 1869 100% G7: Have you always lived in this village? 4566 0.914 1965 0.916 0.278 0 1 4559 0.921 1873 0.902 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 190 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max G8: How many years have you lived in this village? 390 8.094 6.220 0 42 162 4.166 4.701 0.170 26 359 9.368 6.711 0 36 181 7.298 5.918 0 36 H_1: Do you or your household own a Radio? (at baseline 1=yes and 2=no) 4564 1.114 1962 1.12 4558 90.9% 1872 90.8% H_2: Do you or your household own a Television? 4561 1.65 1963 1.715 4552 37.3% 1870 35.2% H_3: Do you or your household own a Bicycle? 4563 1.589 1963 1.582 4546 38.7% 1861 42.2% H_4: Do you or your household own a Motorcycle? 4559 1.898 1959 1.887 4549 12.2% 1862 12.5% H_5: Do you or your household own a Car? 4562 1.972 1960 1.966 4541 2.4% 1859 2.9% H_6: Do you or your household own a Cell phone? 4565 1.089 1960 1.159 4555 92.4% 1862 85.9% H_7: Do you or your household own a Clock/watch? 4564 1.478 1959 1.55 4553 53.5% 1868 48.9% H_8: Do you or your household own a Tape or CD Player? 4561 1.729 1962 1.766 4549 27.3% 1870 23.5% H_9: Do you or your household own a Gas/charcoal stove? 4562 1.394 1961 1.461 4552 67.8% 1867 63.6% H_10: Do you or your household own a Sewing machine? 4559 1.904 1959 1.931 4543 7.7% 1867 6.4% H_11: Do you or your household own a Refrigerator? 4561 1.976 1954 1.975 4538 3.1% 1862 3.7% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 191 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max H_12: Do you or your household own a Table? 4562 1.028 1962 1.056 4551 96.3% 1870 93.6% H_13: Do you or your household own Chairs? 4564 1.022 1961 1.024 4554 97.6% 1871 95.0% H_14: Do you or your household own a Cupboard? 4559 1.36 1962 1.407 4556 64.6% 1871 60.6% H_15: Do you or your household own a Mattress? 4565 1.024 1961 1.032 4558 98.3% 1872 97.8% H_16: Do you or your household own a Generator? 4564 1.946 1960 1.963 4547 5.3% 1867 3.75% H19: Where is your main source of water for household use located? (1=inside house, 2=compound, 3=outside compound) 4556 2.678 1961 2.752 4555 2.721 1863 2.719 H20: What is your dwelling’s flooring material? (1=earth and 4=tile) 4557 1.658 1962 1.661 4555 1.604 1873 1.609 H21: What is your dwelling’s wall material? (1=cardboard and 4=concrete) 4556 1.701 1961 1.691 4552 1.712 1857 1.722 H22: What is your dwelling’s roofing material? (1=grass and 4=tiles) 4562 1.179 1962 1.219 4555 1.124 1871 1.164 J1: RESPONDENT'S GENDER (1=male and 2=female) 4565 1.431 1962 1.34 4580 1.451 1969 1.39 J2: Respondent’s race Black / African 4548 99.7% 1957 99.7% 4545 99.8% 1863 99.8% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 192 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max South Asian (Indian, Pakistani, Etc.) 0.0% 1 0.1% 0.0% 1 0.0% White / European 1 0.0% 1 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% East Asian (Chinese, Korean, Indonesian, Etc.) 6 0.1% 2 0.1% 2 0.0% 1 0.0% Arab / Lebanese / North African 8 0.2% 1 0.1% 4 0.1% 1 0.1% Other 0.0% 1 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% Total 4563 100% 1963 100% 4551 100% 1866 100% J3: What was the primary language used in the interview? English 2207 48.3% 724 36.9% 2817 61.8% 1152 61.5% Kiswahili 1895 41.5% 1002 51.0% 1343 29.5% 479 25.6% Luo 398 8.7% 222 11.3% 340 7.5% 216 11.5% Luhya 4 0.1% 4 0.2% 11 0.2% 7 0.4% Kamba 0.0% 1 0.1% 1 0.0% 1 0.1% Kalenjin 30 0.7% 5 0.3% 17 0.4% 7 0.4% Other 26 0.6% 5 0.3% 22 0.5% 2 0.1% Total 4560 100% 1963 100% 4551 100% 1864 100% J4: Were there any other people listening during interview? (1-5 basline, 0-4 endline) 0/1 no one 1/2 spouse only 2/3 children only 3/4 a few others 4/5 small crowd 4564 1.102 0.503 1 5 1963 1.235 0.710 1 5 4560 0.254 0.922 0 5 1873 0.316 0.954 0 5 J5: Did the respondent check with others for answers to any question? (1=yes and 2=no at baseline) 4560 1.989 1962 1.984 4547 1.9% 1867 2.3% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex iv. Full Set of Descriptive Statistics | Page 193 Question: BASELINE ENDLINE Treatment Control Treatment Control N Mean Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max N Mean/% Std Dev Min Max J6: Do you think anyone influenced the respondent's answers during the interview? (1=yes and 2=no at baseline) 4561 1.996 1962 1.988 4551 .8% 1871 1.8% Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 194 ANNEX V. QUALITATIVE REPORT Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 195 Table of Contents 1. Sampling and Data Collection........................................................................................... 196 2. Economic Empowerment................................................................................................... 198 3. Political Empowerment, Inclusion, and Political Participation ..................................... 207 4. Trust and Social Capital..................................................................................................... 211 5. Violence ............................................................................................................................... 215 6. Self-Efficacy......................................................................................................................... 219 7. Gender Differences in the YYC Program ......................................................................... 222 8. General Views on Yes Youth Can!.................................................................................... 223 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 196 1. Sampling and Data Collection Two methods were employed for the qualitative component of the Yes Youth Can endline study, specifically Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs). Qualitative data collection was conducted between January and February 2014. FGDs were conducted with bunge groups (based on bunge activities), community members, youth in non-YYC groups, and members of dissolved bunges (Error! Reference source not found.). A total of 48 GDs were completed across the six study regions. Key informant interviews were conducted with a variety of YYC participants and implementers, including bunge members at the local, county, and national level, mobilizers, and implementing agencies (Table 2). Broader stakeholders including religious leaders, representatives of civil society organizations, police and parents of YYC youth were also captured in the key informant interviews. A total of 98 key informant interviews were completed across the sample. Table 1: Sampling distribution for Focus Group Discussions Group type 2: Community Group type 3: Control Group type 4: Lapsed Regions Agriculture including crop farming, crop marketing, greenhouse/ nurseries, etc. Livestock including animal raising, selling of animal products, fish ponds, etc. Income generating activities not related to livestock or agriculture Table banking Community service, including providing trainings to the community, construction projects to benefit the community, etc. Social, entertainment, arts Community Members Youths in Non YYC Disolved Bunges Total Central 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 5 Coast 2 2 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 8 Nairobi 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 6 Nyanza 5 5 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 13 Rift Valley 4 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 9 Western 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 7 Total 13 11 2 4 5 1 6 4 2 48 Group type 1: Bunges Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 197 Table 2: Sample breakdown for Key Informant Interviews Regions Bunge leaders, male Bunge leaders, female Members of county bunge Members of national bunge Implementing partner staff, key decision￾makers Mobilizers USAID staff Religious Leaders Government officials: Councilors Government officials: Members of Parliament Police Parents of participating youth Representatives of civil society organizations - local Representatives of civil society organizations - national organizations related to youth, non-violence, and/or democracy Total Central 2 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 0 15 Coast 2 2 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 17 Nairobi 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 0 2 1 1 19 Nyanza 2 2 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 16 Rift Valley 2 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 16 Western 2 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 0 15 Total 12 12 4 4 6 12 1 6 12 2 5 12 6 4 98 YYC participants and implementers Broader YYC stakeholders Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 198 FGDs were conducted with bunge members between 18-35 years, with each group comprising around 8 participants, both male and female. Bunges were selected from an existing database of YYC participants. Selection was based on the primary activity of each group and was aligned to the stipulated quota for each region. A recruitment questionnaire was used to select bunge participants, confirm the bunge activities and ensure that members qualified for participation. For the key informant interviews, snowball sampling approach was used. This is a non-probability method whereby research subjects were invited to provide names and contact details of other actors who were familiar with the YYC program within their respective locations. A set of basic recruitment questions were used to select key informants based on their knowledge of and engagement with the YYC program. A coding frame was developed a priori, based on the key themes in the discussion guides (see Appendix 1). The coding frame was based on the five themes of the YYC program, specifically economic opportunities, political awareness, youth involvement in community activities, attitudes towards tribalism and violence, and sentiments about self-efficacy. This coding frame was then finalized upon a detailed review of transcribed data. The coding frame also captured information about respondent understanding of the YYC program, perceived challenges and successes of the program, and recommendations. Data was then coded and organized using a Computer Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software, Dedoose. It was thereafter reviewed and analyzed thematically whereby patterns within the data were identified among the codes. 2. Economic Empowerment In terms of economic empowerment, it was evident that bunge members recognize the potential opportunities which exist for youth to succeed economically. However, while bunge members were able to identify these opportunities, they were pessimistic about realizing them, as they frequently mentioned the barriers and hurdles they faced. Overall, bunge members understand the potential but find it difficult to succeed economically due to key challenges including lack of funding and high costs of establishing businesses. Generally, there was agreement on the situation of economic opportunities as well as challenges among bunge youth, YYC community members and YYC stakeholders. Perception of Current Situation Opportunities The idea of establishing small businesses and creating employment was frequently mentioned as the preferred alternative among bunge members, many of whom perceived formal employment to be limited and difficult to access. Bunge members, while they experienced a number of challenges with respect to their economic situation, highlighted a number of opportunities for improving their economic outcomes. Experience varied between regions. For example, youth in Nyanza largely felt that there were vast opportunities in agriculture, tree-planting, livestock farming, fish farming and the arts. In Rift Valley, youth also felt that agriculture provided a good avenue for youth to benefit financially. For instance, tourism￾related activities (such as providing guided tours or selling curious/crafts near the region’s sites) were considered to provide opportunities for youth. Poultry keeping was frequently mentioned in the Western region. Some opportunities mentioned by youth in Coast included farming, selling clothing, and building water tanks. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 199 “There could be opportunities for example in small businesses. The youth as they start they might not have that big money, but with the little money and maybe the youth coming together pulling together and maybe starting a small project. In this project with some facilitation in terms of being taught of how to keep good records, and how to borrow some little money it can be a start…” [Livestock Bunge Member, Nyanza Region] “Poultry farming like layers and broilers so that they can supply to schools, and industries so that they get income. After that they can do dairy cattle farming…” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Western Region] Youth in non-YYC communities perceived similar opportunities for the youth as did their bunge counterparts. Examples of opportunities that were highlighted by Nairobi, Western, Nyanza and Rift Valley youth were small income generating activities including car wash projects, garbage collection, charcoal selling, farming and sports. These were identified as viable options for youth to make a living, including youth who belong to organized groups. Youth from Central region generally agreed that opportunities for youth did exist, however they held the view that lack of information on how to access these prevented them from fully realizing them. “Creating a lot of these developments…for the youth to do something in sports, in business, in agriculture, something like that, to bring the youth together to involve their minds in something else rather than staying idle and doing nothing, that can help them to overcome their challenges.” [Non-YYC Youth, Nairobi Region] “Like in Eldoret, there is a lot of athletics and if you go around, you’ll find a lot of youth, especially when you go towards Kapsaret Road. You’ll find youths training and these youths are training to be good athletes and earn some money.” [YYC Community Member, Rift Valley Region] Challenges Overview The most prominent challenge that bunge members across the regions identified with regards to economic opportunities was the general lack of employment opportunities for youth, especially because youth possessed little to no work experience. This was followed by the lack of start-up capital to establish small businesses, which was further compounded by the high cost of registering and setting up businesses. Low education levels were flagged as an important challenge for youth, as was the issue of inadequate skills. Youth generally felt that their goals of succeeding economically were affected by a variety of contextual challenges, which included what was perceived to be inadequate support from the national government. Other secondary challenges that affected youth’s economic success were those related to accessing inputs and markets for their produce, as well as insecurity, corruption and social marginalization of youth. Below is a summary of the perceived challenges according to bunge members in order of significance:  Unemployment / lack of work experience needed to secure employment  Lack of capital to establish businesses  High cost of registering and maintaining businesses (e.g. search fees, licenses, permits, taxes, rent)  Low education levels  Access to credit / difficulties in securing credit due to lack of collateral  Inadequate government support and funding towards youth activities/initiatives Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 200  Inadequate skills/training opportunities Lack of jobs As mentioned, the lack of employment opportunities was the most pressing problem for bunge youth across the regions. Youth further complained of the stringent requirements for work experience, which prevented them from securing jobs. “For the youth there’s a big problem of unemployment, no jobs.” [Livestock Bunge Member, Nyanza Region] “You are looking for a job somewhere then you are told they want three or four year job experience yet you have no experience, so you just have to go.” [Livestock Bunge Member, Rift Valley Region] Non-YYC youth in the Central part of the country felt that as a result of the inadequate job opportunities, educated youth were turning to more modest jobs, for example hairdressing, bar tending and shoe￾shining on a more permanent basis, which in their view was not ideal. This view was also supported by a youth from a dissolved bunge. “… the issue is there are no jobs and it’s either we are looking…or I’m going to start something of my own. So, at the moment as we are speaking what is happening, we have the small businesses, he is in “boda boda” [motorcycle taxi business]”. [Non-YYC Community Member, Central Region] “Sometimes pubs are expanding actually in these new buildings, you will find it has three, four pubs… that’s the industry we are creating for the youth. So unless we do something those opportunities they are very limited, there are not opportunities, we need to create.” [Non-YYC Community Member, Central Region]] “…this time we have no jobs and it’s like people have come down to do business like poultry keeping, bricks laying so we end up in poultry and some of us are not well informed on how to manage chicken, so you find most of them are dying.” [Dissolved Bunge Member, Western Region] Lack of capital and access to finance The general cost of starting up small businesses was perceived to be too high among most youth and community members. In addition, limited access to credit, as well as lack of collateral was also a key barrier for youth when it came to seeking economic success. The cost of acquiring related permits and paying associated taxes were additionally mentioned by non-YYC youth in Nairobi, Western, Coast and Central. “Some of the challenges which I have seen mostly is in acquiring loans, or high incentives from the government, the bank, it’s not easy for the youth because they don’t have title deeds, they don’t own land, they don’t own vehicles, which you can stand as compensation for those loans, that is one challenge…” [Other Income-Generating Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] “I can say… most of these youths for example, when they want to start a business you find that they don’t have that capital to start, so … unless they have that capital, they can start but without it they cannot.” [Non-YYC Youth, Nairobi Region] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 201 “A parent has struggled to get a girl to a hair dressing course or something like that. She needs about Ksh20,000 she says it is enough to start…and maybe to buy a dryer or something, a blow dryer, that’s costing about Ksh20,000 the current [rent] is going to be… Kiambu is about Ksh4,000 or Ksh5,000 within this area then the Ksh20,000, you knock on the council offices, the first license they require is about Ksh10,000.” [Non-YYC Community Member, Central Region] “It is very high currently to start a business, every business…they are high…you can start a business but right now the license fee is very high.” [Non-YYC Community Member, Coast Region] “Financial institutions are not very friendly…you have to have something, you have to have either a good job with a payslip…right now if I’m employed in the government and have a government payslip I will be able to access the SACCOs, if you have a government payslip…you will get it guaranteed because it’s the government or a good job… [or] let’s say you have security like land but for people who don’t have that you just have to hustle, you just have to go somewhere and look something and do and before you go to any financial institution even the government, even the Uwezo Fund... if you hear the terms and conditions it’s not easy.” [Non-YYC Community Member, Nairobi Region] “Now like in our group we have an idea of coming up with catering projects and we don’t have capital, so we are stuck.” [Non-YYC Community Member, Western Region] Additionally, a few bunge youth reported that they were unable to sustain their farming activities due to financial constraints: “The challenges we are going through, let me say like poultry it needs continuous maintenance like vaccination, feeding and you find maybe we as youth, it reaches a point we are not able to maintain the chickens and they need their daily feeding, vaccination after every two weeks and so on, so you find that time has come and we are not able to maintain them.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Western Region] “We don’t have the money to buy [the chickens] expensive medicines…” [Livestock Bunge Member, Rift Valley Region] Lack of sufficient education and skills Among bunge youth, inadequate education did emerge as an issue that affects the extent to which they are able to become economically empowered although there were mixed reports regarding the level of education of bunge youth, with some who had achieved high levels of education and others who had not. In addition, inadequate skills with regards to managerial and even farming skills were mentioned by youth in Nairobi, Western, Nyanza, Rift Valley and Western regions. “Education is the also another challenge, likely poultry [farming] requires you have knowledge about chicken, if you don’t have it, you won’t succeed.” [Livestock Bunge Member, Western Region] “Another challenge I think acquiring skills to manage that business, you can find a youth he desires to have a business but he doesn’t know how to manage it, so skills to manage it matter.” [Other Income-Generating Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 202 Stakeholders in Nairobi and Rift Valley further corroborated the view that youth did not always possess the necessary education and skills to manage businesses or other income generating projects. “Also there is lack of skills because only about 40% [of youth] have reached Form 4 [highest level of secondary education] and about 3% to the university, but since there is not much money being churned out of the youth groups, the learned members tend to seek employment thus leaving the groups without adequate skilled manpower.” [Male Council Member, Rift Valley] “[The youth] lack the skills…however they can start small businesses you see, they can start garages so that they can repair cars.” [Male Police Officer, Central Region] Difficulty accessing Youth Funds An issue mentioned across the regions as an example of the obstacles youth face to realizing economic potential, and more so in Nairobi, was the perceived bureaucracy around the Uwezo Fund,1 the newly established national youth fund, and other government managed youth funds. While the idea of this fund is a good one, as one non-YYC youth mentioned, “Like the Uwezo Fund…it is for the youth and you will find that it helps them…they can form a youth group, open an account at Equity Bank and apply for the funds which can help them start projects that will develop them.” [Non-YYC Community Member, Coast Region] the majority of FGD and KII respondents pointed out the challenges in accessing the funds. Bunge youth largely reported that there is little information on the requirements, processes and procedures for accessing these funds, despite the notion that this endowment was specifically developed to meet the needs of the youth. “I think the national government is not supporting us because I think he should have an office where we should go and seek the information on that Uwezo Fund or Youth Fund but there is no office in our area, so I think he is not supporting us with anything.” [Other Income-Generating Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] “There is this money called Uwezo Fund, according to my understanding…in order to get the Uwezo Fund, you have to go through a process of having a certificate or whatever, going to KRA [Kenya Revenue Authority] and most of the youth don’t have that education that you have to get this, you have to get that, in order to get the money.” [Social Bunge member, Nairobi Region] Members of YYC communities in Nairobi also talked about the limited access to the Uwezo Fund, which was perceived to have a tedious and costly application procedure that caused it to appeal to more privileged as opposed to underprivileged youth. YYC community members in Nyanza held a similar view, stating that other youth funds, for instance the Youth Enterprise Fund2 , did not adequately cater for the youth’s needs as they were often difficult to access, provided only a small grant and took too long to process. 1 The Uwezo Fund is a youth and women’s fund established in April 2013 by President Uhuru Kenyatta. The fund contains an endowment of Ksh6 billion and its mandate is to increase access to credit, to generate self-employment, and to drive community development activities. 2 The Youth Enterprise Development Fund (YEDF) was established in December 2006 by the Government of Kenya to address the unemployment rate among the youth 18-35 years. The main objectives of the fund are to provide loans for on-lending to youth enterprises, attract and facilitate investment for youth enterprises, market products and services of youth enterprises and provide business development services and employment for the youth. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 203 “Again on Uwezo Fund …go to the office for youth, I have a friend of mine who told me personally he went to the youth office, he said how much he wanted because he wanted like Ksh1million or Ksh2million, he was asked whom do you know up there? So for an individual like us here, we don’t know anybody, we have no god fathers up there, there is no way we are getting Uwezo Fund if it’s a million shillings going up. So this Uwezo Fund is for the rich kids, you cannot get the money, for the poor they will keep on getting poorer, we keep on doing our own [things] down there.” [YYC Community Member, Nairobi Region] “Basically, youth have been shortchanged in many ways… even by the Government of Kenya. Something came here called Youth Development Fund from the Youth Enterprise Development Fund, you find a group of 10 people … were being given Ksh47,500 to do business. The amount itself is just too little and the duration it took before it is received is also too long, so youth have got away shortchanged.” [YYC Community Member, Nyanza Region] “The Youth Enterprise Fund is a very good scheme but it’s not benefiting the youth…you can apply for a loan and it takes up to one year.” [YYC Community Member, Nyanza Region] Other Challenges Mentioned Some of the other challenges affecting bunge youth, though mentioned less frequently, were related to:  Poor rainfall patterns and environmental effects on crops  Inadequate infrastructure (roads, etc.) which are important for delivering produce to market  Lack of markets for goods/produce  Perceived social marginalization of youth  Lack of social capital (e.g. networks/connections to acquire jobs)  Corruption  Nepotism  Insecurity (which subsequently affects businesses)  High cost of goods/services Bunge members in Nyanza, Western and Rift Valley spoke of periodic challenges that affected their productivity such as lack of rainfall, crop and animal diseases, as well as difficulties in transporting and selling their produce, which were mentioned across various regions including Coast, Rift Valley, Nyanza and Western, as illustrated in the below excerpts: “One obstacle is lack of market. Getting somewhere to sell is not easy, the only time we can sell is during the festive season like December. That’s when we sell a lot of chicken. When it comes to honey, we haven’t got a stable place to sell. We just look for orders from people to sell.” [Livestock Bunge Member, Coast Region] A few youth also felt that the fact that they were based in deeply rural areas lead to marginalization, as they did not have access to the same opportunities and information as youth based in more urban, centralized locations. “[We] in the furthest end of Uasin Gishu County…such that if [money] is being allocated in Eldoret, our headquarters, we feel we are the last to be considered.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Rift Valley Region] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 204 Issues of perceived corruption and nepotism were also raised. The view that one must be well connected with people in leadership and power in order to secure jobs was widely held among youth across the regions. A few youth in Coast and Nairobi regions felt that while the Youth Fund was a noble initiative, the funds did not always reach the intended beneficiaries, resulting in suspicions of fund misappropriation within government structures. “Nepotism, it affects us a lot here. If we don’t know somebody somewhere, you can come up with a great idea but since we are not related you won’t help us.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Nyanza Region] “…bribery, that is the biggest [challenge] in Kenya, if you can’t bribe, you can’t get a job, if you [do not have a] family link to that person, the manager the CEO, the supervisor that means your opportunities/chances are very rare.” [Social Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] “In the national government there is the Youth Fund; my question is where is this money going? Yes the money is there but I’m wondering where it goes after it reaches the Senate?” [Community Service Bunge Member, Coast Region] In addition to the unemployment problems mentioned by bunge members, non-YYC youth in Nairobi specifically mentioned lack of role models and a general sense of disempowerment among youth as challenges facing young people. Role of the Bunge/Youth Groups Most bunge members across the regions reported that bunge groups provided an ideal vehicle for improving economic opportunities for the youth. Nearly all bunges captured in the endline evaluation were involved in at least one income generating activity. The most frequently mentioned income generating activity for youth across the regions was farming and agribusiness (poultry farming and growing vegetables was popular in the Western, Rift Valley, and Nyanza regions) followed by garbage collection. “And then we enrolled in YYC, they were good and they boosted us with grant, so we thought which project can we do and we decided to invest in poultry, and in fact we sold some in December so we are thinking of renting a farm so that we can farm maize, that’s how we are moving with that grant that we were given.” [Livestock Bunge Member, Western Region] “…it is located on the shores of the ocean…When I went there, they did not have any business idea. I went and talked to the elders, they mobilized the youth, they picked the volunteers and then we started the bunge. So fishing was their main activity. We decided to venture into the business. We got the information from the ministry, the officer decided to visit them. They got the chicken litter, breeding stock from a farm in Malindi and they were helped. By the time I was leaving Malindi, they were on round three of selling the stock….they are doing well.” [Male Mobilizer, Coast Region] “We wrote a proposal and succeeded in getting a grant of Ksh40,000 and it was a garbage collection project. It helped us economically because we have employed 10 youth and they get their income from it.” [Male Bunge Leader, Rift Valley Region] Some of the other activities that were mentioned by bunge youth, though less frequently, were related to creative arts (such as beadwork), entertainment, sports and services such as car washing and hairdressing. These are listed below. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 205  Catering  Bee keeping  Bead work  Hairdressing  Car wash  Charcoal making  Soap making  Community theatre/arts  Sporting activities In the majority of cases and across all regions, members agreed that the idea of having an organized group provided them strength and resources, including a pool of diverse talents, skills and ideas to creatively and effectively pursue income generating activities. “There’s also a saying that one finger cannot kill a flee. And that oneness is strength and separation a weakness.” [Livestock Bunge Member, Coast Region] “…when you are a single youth you cannot do anything but when they come together with different skills, they create a bigger block…a bigger opportunity from a small thing…I can give you an example: garbage, you know a single youth cannot clean the whole of this neighborhood but when they come together even three or five, they can clean up and end up being paid for it…” [Other Income-Generating Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] The bunge SACCO was also reported to play a significant role in providing savings and credit services to youth across the regions for small loans. Similarly, table-banking was said to have encouraged members to access funds to develop and enhance their individual goals, such as in education and business. While both SACCO and table banking facilities were found to be particularly convenient among youth for small loans, for purchasing items such as farm inputs and motorcycles, they were not effective vehicles for obtaining funding for large business investments. “Half of the grant, of the money that was to be given to the youth economically was taken to SACCOs and up to date I know very many youth and youth groups that have saved in the SACCO For instance may be we are contributing kshs. 500 each and they are now getting loans from the SACCO.” [Male Mobilizer, Rift Valley Region] “We do have what we call table banking…for instance may be we are contributing Ksh500 each, so that we meet all of us let’s say we are twenty...we give Ksh20,000 to one person.” [Table Banking Bunge Member, Central Region] “We also have what we call savings, we just take it to the bank, we borrow a small loan, and then carry on…we buy one of the members a motorcycle, if they are a farmer and would like to boost their business.” [Table Banking Bunge Member, Central Region] “I can say that [the table banking] has helped me a lot because for one from the group we have savings and loans. I can borrow money from the group and then I use the money to cultivate my own farm.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Rift Valley Region] A few bunge youth reported having received business start-up training, which they found valuable as they ventured into small business on an individual and group level. Bunge youth in the Coast and Western Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 206 regions also reported having received specific training on poultry farming and bee-keeping from partner organizations. “We also did what we called “do it yourself business start-up training.” This was helpful because it is used to help the youth explore new business ideas, how to start a business, how to market themselves, and things like that.” [Male Mobilizer, Coast Region] However, about half of the bunge members in the focus groups held the view that the bunge did not play a sufficient role in improving the economic outcomes of members, particularly because the proposed grants were not awarded to all bunges as members had expected. “…it has been illusions; we are being told ‘we are going to [give you funds], we are going to facilitate, but there is not one given time they have ever done that.” [Community Service Bunge Member, Central Region] “I will also say no because if you look at the number of youth that have actually benefited from the economic part of it, they are 5%, because the grant didn’t actually get to everyone.” [County Bunge Member, Rift Valley Region] YYC stakeholders shared dissimilar views about the success of the bunges. In some cases, community members reported that bunges had played a role in supporting the youth in pursuing income generative activities, while other stakeholders did not agree that the bunges had succeeded in this area. For example, a government representative said he did not observe any impact on economic outcomes among bunge youth in his area, while a bunge member parent expressed otherwise. “Not in my area, maybe in the newspaper as I would see maybe one or two groups maybe in Naivasha or somewhere probably benefited. I don’t know, I’m still waiting to see them roll out projects, you never lose hope, so we are still waiting to see whether they would come to the ground and do tangible projects and uplift our youth economically.” [Male Councilor, Central Region] “They have succeeded …like there are two [bunge] youth and they usually come to my house and I give them breakfast or sometimes lunch but for now they have succeeded because when they sell the charcoal or the soap they get money and they don’t come here anymore.” [Mother of Bunge Member, Coast Region] Members of dissolved bunges also felt that the bunge played a role in trying to uplift their economic situations. During the bunge’s lifetime, one dissolved bunge in Western region was able to receive training on greenhouse farming and poultry keeping. While this was beneficial, bunge members struggled with lack of capital to fully launch their activities, as well as the lack of materials to manage their chicken and greenhouses: “…we lacked some of the materials…like for poultry, we didn’t have the places where we could keep these chicken, also for tomatoes we didn’t have the equipment to use.” [Dissolved Bunge Member, Western Region] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 207 3. Political Empowerment, Inclusion, and Political Participation In terms of political empowerment, bunge youth generally felt that they were not well supported by the government who were often unavailable to the youth. Most youth reported that political inclusion of the youth only occurred prior to national elections, as political leaders sought to capitalize on youth votes. While youth expressed interest in political issues, they cited lack of resources, general lack of confidence and inadequate support from the community as factors which limited their political participation. However, YYC was reported to have played a positive role in developing governance skills and leadership, and increasing political engagement of bunge youth. Among stakeholders, the program was reported to have succeeded in voter registration and mobilization, national identity card registration and provision of civic education. Perception of Current Situation Responsiveness of Government Officials Generally, youth across the regions did not feel fully supported by government officials. Most reported that government officials engaged youth mostly during election season, reason being that candidates sought to garner the youth vote during this time. Once election season was over, most political leaders were reported to immediately neglect them such that there were no avenues or forum for their views or needs to be heard. In addition, youth mentioned that locally elected leaders were largely inaccessible, with most generally not concerned with youth issues, and were perceived to focus far more attention on their own interests. While a few youth expressed that the current president-elect and the central government have made positive efforts to engage youth politically, most bunge members across the regions did not share this opinion, and instead felt that the national government did not invite youth to participate actively in political issues and decision-making post-election season. Rather, youth held the view that older community members wanted to maintain power and influence over their communities: “They tell you the Governor or the MP is in a meeting… but he is in the office, he is sitting down, when you want to call him, he has changed his number.” [Livestock Bunge Member, Rift Valley Region] “They don’t listen, they only listen before they are elected, once they are elected they don’t listen, they don’t want to see you, they have nothing to do with you.” [Social Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] “I think our leaders misuse us because they only come to us when they need our votes. We give them our views, they say when they are elected that’s the first thing they’ll do. When they are elected, they disappear, there’s nothing they do.” [Livestock Bunge Member, Coast Region] “Yes, I think they do listen but they are not fully supportive. I have not yet seen it.” [Community Service Bunge Member, Central Region] “What I can say for instance the area MP for Nyaribari Masaba…he is inaccessible…they don’t pick our calls. We text them they don’t reply.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Nyanza Region] “County Rep comes from Ngomongo and we come from Korogocho area, if you are in Korogocho area [and] you go to the County Rep for help, he can’t help you because you are in Korogocho, he says you did not vote for him.” [Social Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 208 Youth Political Participation Views about political participation were largely similar across bunge and non-bunge youth. While youth expressed interest in political matters, they cited a few barriers that inhibited most of them from being more actively engaged in politics. One of the hurdles which was identified by youth was financial resources. The lack of funds was cited as a significant limitation among the youth, particularly when considering other financial demands. Youth strongly expressed their views about the need to have large amounts of money to effectively participate in any type of politics within Kenya, a factor which then leads to their exclusion: “…the thing is this you have to have cash, if you don’t have cash you cannot go through because at the end of it, it’s politics… your pocket has to be full for you to give something little for the voters to give you back whatever you want… generally in Kenya you have to have money to give the people who are giving you back the votes.” [YYC Community Member, Nairobi Region] In addition, youth noted that lack of confidence among the youth, and the lack of trust in youth leaders from the wider community also affected their level of political participation. As a result, youth were more likely to attend political campaigns but not as serious political actors: “I think also our societies tend to influence our youth, in terms of politics, in that there’re some societies and some communities where they believe a youthful person cannot be a very good leader and so they tend to discourage them that ‘you cannot lead us, you cannot … how can you reach the old people?’…80% of youth know about politics, but they lack that courage of taking a risk. Taking a risk whereby to go for a post because most of our youth are just there to be used. They are just there to go for campaign rallies.” [YYC Community Member, Rift Valley Region] Role of the Bunge/Youth Groups The YYC program was reported by most bunge youth to have played an important role across the regions in mobilizing voters as well as encouraging youth to obtain documentation, specifically national identity and voter registration cards, prior to the 2013 general election. The ‘My ID, My Life’ campaign was further singled out as one of the key initiatives that YYC youth were involved in during this period. “In our area for sure [the bunge] has helped many youth because in this Bungoma County, for most of the youth getting an ID [card] was a problem but through our leaders and the members most of youth now have IDs and most of them voted. So I’m very grateful for this group of ours through our leaders and members, they have done a great job.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Western Region] “I may say that our group sensitized the community especially in taking an ID [card] and registering voters.” [Livestock Bunge Member, Nyanza Region] Bunge members felt they benefited directly from civic education training delivered by the implementing partners. They were also involved in educating and sensitizing fellow youth and others in the community around political issues, including civic education training on leadership and the constitution. This was corroborated by community members and YYC stakesholders who felt the YYC program had successfully trained the youth and spoke highly of youth leadership and the civic education campaigns these youth conducted to educate others. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 209 “Just here at Maunda we were taught how to educate others about elections, how to vote without violence, also on the constitution, yeah such things, at least we gathered people… the one I attended it was organised by YYC and there were people who came from Nairobi and some other places to teach people…” [Non-YYC Youth, Western Region]. “What I have seen mostly is that the youth are involved in giving civic education, awareness, they are very active on that part, most of the youths who went to the training, are very active on that part.” [Female CSO Member, Nairobi Region] Bunge members in Nairobi, Central, Coast and Rift Valley also noted that a number of their fellow members had successfully competed for elective posts in the last election, many of whom gained appointments in county assemblies and parliament. This was corroborated by program stakeholders who felt that the leadership and mobilizing experience of bunge members and mobilizers led to the unintended outcome of youth running for and gaining political office. “The role [of YYC] was to help the groups know what kind of a leader they want, secondly the interest and the priorities of the youth. They also facilitated debates so that the leaders could know what they want from a leader. What kind of a leader they want and if he will present their interest. We have four groups that participated. One of them vied for M.P from Mtaani group Kilifi North, we have somebody coming from Jaribuni for members of County Assembly, they didn’t achieve but they wanted. Out of their interest in [politics, we have two of them who have been absorbed in the County Assembly. The other one has been active in attending different forums at the Coast. The others are recognized as representatives of the community. [Male Mobilizer, Coast Region] “..a very good example is one of Uasin Gishu [County], I can’t remember the ward but he was the president of the Uasin Gishu County bunge youth group and during mobilization he volunteered to mobilize so he had mobilized the whole of that ward. He mobilized so many youth to join bunges so when the time came he felt like ‘wow, this is a nice platform, the same people can vote for me.’ To me that is an intended consequence but we didn’t go out to make youth be part of their political system but for creating awareness. I feel the program has done a very good job.” [Female USAID Staff member, Nairobi Region] “…quite a number of [bunge] youth have been able to get positions especially in CDF [Constituency Development Fund] committees [and] in Uwezo Fund… they have been able to have positions...because of their commitment to work they have been able to join committee service in NGOs and some have been appointed as sub-county administrators.” [Male Implementing Partner, Western Region] “I think the fact that many [bunge] youth came up to vie for those posts actually we were competing politically for elective posts and most of the [bunge] youth won…politically I feel [YYC] made an impact… because they were able to identify youth leaders who would be listened to, who were voices of reason in their respective communities. So, by so doing those leaders were able to even come up at the heights of the elections and to call people and preach peace….” [Male Council Member, Central Region] While many bunge members attributed this elective success to the support they received from the YYC program, others indicated that they were required to relinquish their membership from the bunge board leadership in order to pursue elective positions. While this was not necessarily viewed as a negative factor, participants and implementers did note that it was a requirement of the program that YYC board Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 210 members step down from their positions before pursuing political positions, in order to avoid conflicts of interest. “I did actually run for the post of MCA [Member of County Assembly] but what came up from the program then was that if you are vying for any position you were supposed to relinquish your position as a board member.” [Male County Bunge Member, Rift Valley Region] Despite the challenges that youth shared with regards to receiving support from government officials, some bunge members reported that their association with the bunge accorded them increased access to leaders such as Members of Parliament, Governors, and Members of the County Assemblies: “Another thing is that right now, it is possible to meet and talk with your MP or your councilor. But before then, one always wondered on where to start if you wanted to meet with them.” [Female Bunge Leader, Western Region] Among implementing partners and the YYC community, it was also noted that the program encouraged youth to become more politically active, to voice their views regarding politics and leadership, and to hold political leaders accountable. Bunge youth parents spoke of how youth are now making more informed decisions about how they would elect their leaders. “You know politics is a hard term to use but I will call it leadership – yes they are involved more in leadership due to the fact that they can elect their leaders from the village level, county level…they are more involved in knowing the best leaders. During the elections we had debates in the villages, the county with people asking for positions. They would then determine who is best suited and then they just discuss the issue… so they have been more involved in politics.” [Female Implementing Partner, Coast Region] “The youth in general were not following these politicians blindly, they were able to make their free choices so from that, like in our places here there was these euphoric tendencies of either electing these candidates who were maybe handpicked or imposed on people as the clear candidate, but then these was not the case this time.” [Male YYC- Youth Parent, Nyanza Region] Members of the YYC communities thought the benefits of belonging to a youth group with regards to political participation were creating a unified youth voice, being easily able to share information among different youth constituencies through the bunge network, becoming more engaged with the political leadership in their communities and even identifying ways of seeking support from their political leaders. Members of the County Assembly (formerly known as councilors) reported that the program did succeed in identifying youth leaders and engaging them in political processes at the community level, specifically through including them in chief’s barazas and county assembly activities, where they had an opportunity to represent the views of the youth. “Like he said, when you come together you have a voice and also you can find somebody from another constituency who has the know-how. He will come and teach the group on what he knows and this will be of great help…when you come together in groups, you find that we have leadership like the chairman, secretary and all the executives, we learn leadership from this. From leaders that we have, you may find that their leadership qualities have been exposed and they may end up in politics.” [Non-YYC Youth, Coast Region] “The youth will benefit because…some will think about politics, they will even know how to seek for the government’s support and if there is an issue troubling them, through that group…they will Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 211 look at how they can go to the county representative…it will make them more aware [of how to] solve their political issues.” [YCC Community Member, Coast Region] Members of the YYC communities in Nyanza and Coast also mentioned the opportunity that bunges provided youth to organize and govern themselves, as was demonstrated by their ability to practice democracy through coordinating group elections for various positions include chairpersons, treasurers and secretaries. Similarly, stakeholders from the civil society noted that YYC had played in instilling governance skills among the youth, enabling them to manage their groups effectively. 4. Trust and Social Capital Bunge youth were actively involved in community activities across the regions. These ranged from community policing activities, clean up exercises, health promotion, and community development projects in collaboration with community leaders. While youth were generally treated with mistrust in their communities, stakeholders and community members reported that their views of bunge youth had changed, and that the program had led to positive outcomes among the bunge members, specifically an increased sense of responsibility and commitment to self-improvement and community engagement among youth. Perception of the Current Situation A key challenge expressed by youth was their often negative perception by community members. These community members tended to view youth as irresponsible, untrustworthy, inexperienced and unruly, which inadvertently affects their level of influence and activity within the community. Youth also felt that they were marginalized in terms of being able to weigh in on community dialogue on key issues due to their age, with many simply not participating in active decision-making and community building as a result. “The youth are being seen as the bad omen in the community, whenever a chicken is stolen somewhere they say it is the youth, cows get lost, charcoal they say it is the youth.” [Male County Bunge Member, Rift Valley Region] “The youth are not trusted…we are just used as noise makers.” [Table Banking Bunge Member, Central Region] “In the beginning, it was tough but now they have come to realize that it’s important to them to accept us because there are some things they can’t do well and we can, so we help each other in the community.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Western Region] “…the community barazas [meetings], we have chief’s barazas held by village elders; if you air your views you are told you are still young, there is nothing you can tell them.” [Community Service Bunge, Coast Region] Role of the Bunge Members frequently spoke of the types of interactions that take place between them and other community members and leaders. Several reported positively stating that they received support from elders, chiefs and religious leaders in their locales when it came to organizing youth events and community events including football games and charitable activities. This was largely due to their involvement in the YYC program, which was perceived positively among community members. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 212 “On community participation the Mama Mtaa [female community leader] holds a meeting on a specific day. On that day she allows us to air any grievances we might be having. They involve us because we want to be part of them. They don’t have a specific day but whenever they call us we go although our meetings are held on Monday and Thursdays. Mama Mtaa summoned us that the chief was complaining that he hardly hears of our groups. We told her we are very much alive and showed her our certificate from there he always wants to know of our progress.” [Other Income-Generating Bunge Member, Coast Region] “…from the start we organized a community meeting and we involved the pastors, the village elders, the chiefs and we told them we have this youth program, therefore, they know there is something going on and they like it… the community has accepted us completely…when we make complaints or if we are stuck somewhere, when we tell them they help out, therefore they accepted us.” [Livestock Bunge Member, Coast Region] Most bunge youth spoke of becoming more involved in community-level activities, often organized through their respective bunge groups. These activities included the following, organized frequency of mention:  Community policing  Community clean-up and environmental activities  Health related activities  Anti-drug and rehabilitation activities  General involvement in constituency development projects Community policing was mentioned as one of the activities that bunge youth in Western, Central, Nairobi, and Nyanza regions regularly participated in. Bunge youth noted that their communities often relied on them as youth to provide a voluntary security service, by patrolling the neighborhoods and alerting the authorities of potential risks. Most bunge youth were also involved in community clean-up exercises, as bunge members from Nairobi, Central, and Coast regions reported. Youth engaged their communities in these activities, using local leaders and church gatherings to gain community buy-in. Similarly, youth were also involved in tree￾planting exercises. These activities were well-received in the community, as was explained by some bunge members from Central province: “…in my constituency we held a cleanup…we held a clean up there, we held…fun Olympics running with water, with eggs that kind of stuff. When you hold this stuff [in the community] it is really fun…we announce these things through the churches, so the elderly are aware this is happening and you find yourself even when you are walking by the road side a lady will stop you and [ask] “what are you doing of late? I will tell my son to come” …that is nice.” [Female National Bunge Member, Central Region] “I remember there was a nursery school in my place also, the place was very much neglected because…so, we had an environment activity, we cleared the nursery, we planted trees. Currently there are big trees. So the community saw that the youth are doing a good job so they are willing to participate in the community and they are willing to engage the youth more because they can see the youth are doing positive things.” [Male County Bunge Member, Central Region] Bunge youth across the regions, including Nairobi, Western, Rift Valley and Coast further mentioned their involvement in advocacy activities related to drugs and social issues, whereby they communicated to Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 213 youth and the larger community on certain causes. Bunge youth in Nairobi were also involved in counselling fellow youth who were using substances, and providing rehabilitation support for those who were recovering from addition. Bunge youth felt that they were in a good position to interact with their communities about the risks of drug use, particularly bunge youth who had previous experience with drug use. One youth in Rift Valley also mentioned that bunge youth were involved in community advocacy activities around female genital mutilation. “There was advocacy about it, they used to talk even to those boys who normally take drugs.” [Female Bunge Leader, Rift Valley Region] “Recently we had a walk against drugs and substance abuse so in that you gain the confidence of the community and also we have been participating in like community policing and all that, [the community] see’s you in a positive way.” [IDI0122Central_BungeLeaderMale01] “I know very many [bunge youth] who have even gone to the community to do a lot of things, some are fighting alcoholism, some are fighting FGM [Female Genital Mutilation], some are fighting a lot of things which has led to recognition in the community by the people who are living around.” [Male Mobilizer, Rift Valley Region] Bunge youth were also involved in providing voluntary community health services. Youth in Western and Central regions reported their involvement in national health campaigns, specifically the polio eradication campaign, through collaboration with other members of the community. Youth in Nairobi and Coast also mentioned their involvement in health promotion and behaviour change activities geared towards youth with respect to HIV and safe sex practices. “They [the community] also engages us when they want to pass information, for example, when we have programs like malaria, polio…the importance of taking children to be vaccinated against polio and also we make sure all children in the village have been vaccinated.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Western Region] “This bunge has been of help to the youth because like this lady just told you we usually visit the victims of HIV/AIDS and by so doing we usually unite them together and talk to them about the disease and also some other things.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Coast Region] Across the regions, bunge youth indicated that they were involved in local development activities. In the Coast and Western regions, bunge youth collaborated with the local chiefs, councilors and ward representatives to discuss community needs and issues. In the Western region, youth were able to successfully launch safe water and sanitation projects within their communities, as two bunge leaders reported: “I have seen some youth in Kilifi County and the group is called Vigilant. The youth have been able to engage the area chief and the community around to even entrust them with some of their offices. Whenever we have meetings especially for the youth, they will always involve them and engage the chiefs. Most of the youths are in CDF [Constituency Development Fund] projects…we even have some ladies who have engaged the county representatives.” [Female Mobilizer, Coast Region] “We came together as a group… came to discover that there is a water kiosk which was built by CDF [Constituency Development Fund] and was vandalized by the elderly people and they left it like that so…so we went ahead and claimed for that restoration of that water and they gave the mandate to the youth…If you get into Mandizini, the pit latrines were scarce and…it is a right for Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 214 tenants to have pit latrines so we went ahead to the Ministry of Health and claimed for the land to build the pit latrine.” [Male Bunge Member, Western Region] “For example, from what they taught us, there is a neighboring group that embarked on a water selling project. This in turn helped the community a lot and this was possible through the YYC fund. They have also constructed a public toilet and this too has helped the community.” [Female Bunge Leader, Western Region] How Community Members/Stakeholders’ Views of Youth Have Changed Because of the YYC Program Most stakeholders and community members generally noted that the YYC program had improved the lives and dispositions of the youth. While youth were often perceived to be idle and unreliable, stakeholders and community members across the regions felt that YYC had provided the youth with an opportunity to discover themselves, harness their skills for their own benefit, as well as make positive contributions to the community in ways that made them more highly esteemed. These sentiments were expressed by a cross-section of community members: “Before some of them joined the group their life was not very good, their attitudes and how they used to conduct themselves wasn’t encouraging especially with my son who joined this group, I have noted very big difference. He is now becoming self-reliant and he doesn’t ask me for anything he might need. Sometimes I see them engaging in profit making ventures like the other day they wanted to sell the first lot of their chickens…” [Male Religious Leader, Rift Valley Region] “Due to the fact that the youth have now taken leadership role, the fact that youth are now engaging the administration, the fact that the youth now can be included in committees at the village level…they are now recognized and their participation is really important and they were not there, they were not included in those committees originally and now they can sit there and engage…” [Female Implementing Partner, Coast Region] “These days, the community have started to have positive view towards the youth because they have seen even now the youth themselves have started to participate in some programs…so even the community…the old parents they have now started to see that even the youth can start their own things and they are coming up with so many things.” [Male Policeman, Central Region] “I’m very happy about them, and I really feel that if possible, and if this program could continue, I’m sure that at least we’ll be able to make the youth to find themselves because most of the had lost themselves.” [Female CSO Member, Nairobi Region] Parents across the regions noted that their views and attitudes towards bunge youth had changed, and that they had observed a sense of increased leadership and responsibility among youth, which resulted in an increased sense of trust for the youth. Parents reported that bunge youth were more likely to engage in dialogue with community elders and leaders, and willingly participate in community forums, which did not happen frequently before their involvement in the bunge. Parents also found that youth were more focused and more committed to adding value to themselves and to their communities, principles which could be attributed to the YYC program: “…now since they are behaving well and they are doing well, I can even support them instead of fearing them. So I am with them. I can now sponsor them… I can now trust them. Because they are together and I am seeing what they are doing.” [Male YYC Youth Parent, Central Region] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 215 “[I see] a very big difference because now as of this time, this moment, you cannot just go there and find them seating there idle, yes at least you find them preoccupied with either farming or some other kind of job related duties…you can see youth coming up now and [addressing] various issues at the society level, you can see youth coming now and they impact positively on the way things are being done maybe by the provincial administration, maybe the political ministry at the community level…maybe you can see them now going to chiefs’ barazas which they never used to do and in fact contributing positively [now]...” [Male YYC Youth Parent, Nyanza Region] “My daughter is above 18 years. You see there is also what we call youth mentorship… when they are there [at the bunge] they learn to become leaders…they are now coming up as leaders and when people are occupied with activities and as leaders…you can see that they are working within a goal, are very active and have little time to waste…it shows in terms of leadership, how they interact and how they think globally. So I think apart from the financial benefits [the bunge] brings about [other] dimensions, political dimension, administrative dimension and the values that are imparted when they meet and talk give them an inch above the rest, and also at the same time they are used as ambassadors to inculcate needed values in others and I believe this is a way of empowering society. I also believe that nowadays there is a slight change as I remember in the past there used to be shouting and hooliganism everywhere from the youth but nowadays the youth pattern is changing in a different way. Also the youth nowadays see themselves as the leaders of tomorrow and they are challenged to take up the mantle in a positive way.” [Male YYC Youth Parent, Coast Region] 5. Violence Overall, bunge youth recognized the need for peaceful coexistence, before and after the 2013 general elections, with most youth reflecting on the senseless violence that marked the 2007 elections. Most bunge youth still struggled with issues around tribalism, however the valued the idea of peace and promoting ethnic diversity among their groups. Most bunges were actively involved in various peace promotion activities, leading up to the general elections. Stakeholders were also able to report on the positive role that YYC played in mobilizing peace initiatives for youth and communities more broadly. Perception of the Current Situation Bunge youth were highly cognizant of ethnic differences within their communities, and many indicated that negative ethnicity was still a reality they faced regularly. A clear example of how poignant ethnicity is in Kenya, is the 2007 general elections, which was marred by violence driven by ethnic clashes in views, beliefs and perceptions. Despite the more stable elections held in 2013, youth still expressed views that tensions and antagonism across and within tribal lines still emerged across the country, but most appreciated the increased tolerance and peacefulness that they observed during electoral process. Recognizing how youth had been targeted and deliberately mobilized in 2007, youth across regions reiterated that during the recent elections, most youth chose to shun violence and maintain peace, by making conscious decisions to refuse to be used by politicians to create unrest and conflict: “You have to understand that ethnicity, tribalism and all that is deep rooted. It starts from the smallest basic unit in Kenya which is the family. A parent will make you be conscious of the fact that you are a Kikuyu, a Kalenjin or a Luo and I have a feeling they were telling this to the youth because they participated in the violence largely [in 2007].” [Male Bunge Leader, Rift Valley Region] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 216 “…you know sometimes when leaders want to cause violence like chaos they look for organized groups…but these days as I told you the youth have woken up, they have stood up for themselves, I don’t think they can [cause violence].” [Livestock Bunge Member, Nyanza Region] “[During] the post-election violence, we are the ones who played a major role in uprooting railways, other property but this one which past, youth thought [to themselves] ‘why should I leave my chicken and go shouting on the roads, that I stop watering the vegetables and I attend the campaign rallies and it won’t benefit me in any way…” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Western Region] “I think that the youth also understood the effects of violence because they knew the situation they were in back in 2007 now they decided that there was no need, they were fearing because they knew if they engage in violence the highest numbers that are killed are the youth, first the police usually kill the youth if they get them, two or three in a house they think that they are gangsters so the youth saw that there was no need for violence.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Coast Region] “They saw what happened, no one likes to see someone dying, then when they think that they caused that person to get hurt. When we are told to come and burn down this school, for fifty shillings, and be part of those who burn down the school, then you look and see if it’s beneficial to the community, if you have been blinded by fifty shillings you will destroy it. If you look at that picture and now it’s very different and will still be.” [Livestock Bunge Member, Nyanza Region] Role of the Bunge/Youth Groups Overall, the youth felt that the YYC platform provided them with an opportunity to unite as youth of various tribes, and enabled them to promote peace within their communities through these groups. The program was most frequently credited with supporting the following types of events which focused heavily on communicating messages of anti-tribalism and peace, and were individually led and implemented by bunge groups on the ground, in order of the most frequently mentioned:  Peace campaigns and concerts (e.g. ‘Tuko Rada’ festival in Nairobi)  Peace football tournaments  Theatre/drama  Roadshows These activities were perceived to be relatively successful among bunge youth. The ‘Tuko Rada’ peace festival, which was highlighted as the flagship peace campaign, was described as a collaborative effort between YYC and other programs/partners. Peace football tournaments were mentioned frequently in Nairobi, as were small community theatre activities that were intended to role-play the effects of tribalism and violence. YYC and bunge-led peace campaigns were reported by youth across the regions, as was training on peace and conflict prevention. Bunge members and mobilizers explained the peacemaking initiatives that were activated in these regions: “We had peace building activities, peace building training and under that we have modules like conflict resolution, ethnic tolerance and then we went ahead and formed peace committees in the villages. This comprised of the youth and the bunges. We went and formed bunges and their Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 217 work is to promote these peace activities. We had other bigger peace activities which were run all over the country.” [Female Mobilizer, Coast Region] “There was a football tournament that brought different groups together and they were coming together so that they can pass information about peace.” [Male Bunge Leader, Nairobi Region] “We did a peace campaign also, so the youth demonstrated that they want peace during the elections. That is they want peace before elections, during, and after elections. So, I believe that’s why there was no violence reported during the elections. So, I can say the YYC did a good job.” [Male County Bunge Member, Central Region] “We went to door to door and communicated to our youth, before the elections we were having forums on peace workshops as bunges and encouraging ourselves, that our opportunity in the community is more important than the violence…” [Other Income-Generating Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] Bunge youth also reported that the groups were designed to promote harmony and diversity within themselves, and that this is one of the principals by which they were formed. They reported that they were encouraged to form groups that had fair representation of various ethnicities. The idea of accepting and incorporating members of different ethnic backgrounds in the bunges was found to be important, as youth did not want to be polarized among themselves on the basis of tribe, and instead proposed to stick to the goal of unity. Further, a few bunge youth and mobilizers reported that the bunge helped to break down ethnic boundaries within their communities. “Like in our group, we have Kikuyus, Luos, Kalenjins since it is within town and this is what we call cooperation. During elections, you would find that some Kikuyus were not in the Jubilee party but in another one. So this has brought about that cooperation and thus, it is hard for us to fight or gang up against each other. People have been living together, doing business together and just got used to each other. This means there is no way you can then turn against your neighbor since we are now like brothers and sisters.” [Female Bunge Leader, Western Region] “They told us that we should have many people of different languages… YYC came and told us the best way is to have people of different tribes.” [Female Bunge Leader, Nairobi Region] “It has helped because when we meet in these groups like 2007 there was post-election violence, but after forming these groups, like in our group we are people of different tribes, so now that we are joined we can’t allow another tribe to be hurt in our group. For me it’s like my sister or my brother. So we sat and taught ourselves even the issue of youths being used by politicians when we are together like now we don’t want. Even if we are called somewhere in a meeting with a politician, if he calls me as a leader, if he speaks we come and talk to the youth when we are all together, we cannot be separated either by tribe or color, we are all the same.” [Female Bunge Leader, Coast Region] The YYC program was also reported to provide youth of different ethnic backgrounds the opportunity to take on leadership positions in ethnically diverse regions. This was well-explained by one national bunge member of Luhya ethnicity, who commented on the fact that he was able to serve successfully in his role in Central region, where the majority of bunge youth and community members were of Kikuyu ethnicity: “Akubasu here is my name, I’m the president elected in Kiambu County…it is well known to each and everybody it’s a Kikuyu dominant area, they have looked upon this [Luhya] gentleman as a national leader who can also transform and do something to this community. Sincerely speaking I Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 218 can say yes, YYC had brought some communities together, and we are working as a team.” [Male National Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] With regards to reducing tribalism, there were mixed views among bunge members about the success of the program in bridging tribal divides and promoting cohesion among people of different ethnicities, as one mobilizer explained: “I cannot categorically say that it has happened because most people are from here and they are all Mijikendas. It is only in Mariakani and other parts that have different people. Kilifi didn’t want to be part of Kenya and they really didn’t want to vote. I can’t say it has that impact. There are groups that were initiated by the government to do the peace thing even in Mtwapa and others were initiated by the NGOs. Just like in Kilifi, I think we share among the stakeholders but in terms of accepting that Kenyans have to vote, just that Kilifi is like others, I think it has contributed a lot. But when it comes to conflict, I don’t think [the bunge] has anything to do with it.” [Female Mobilizer, Coast Region] However, in Nairobi, one youth mobilizer had a different view of the role that YYC was playing in improving ethnic cohesion, instead citing a case of ethnic favoritism which created tension within the bunges: “There, [the YYC program] didn’t do good, they did not do good because first of all when you organize a group of youth and members of different communities, there are some things that you don’t do, one of the problems…was favoritism in YYC, there was favoritism because you find that a member of this group or community he did not want to interact with other member or any information given they were not able to relay it to other members, to other community members, that speak.. Their languages are different, you see so there was that problem. It was one of the problems.” [Male Mobilizer, Nairobi Region] According to one bunge youth from the Central region, the YYC program also provided a channel for youth to report incidences of violence or hate speech, through an SMS service. This was reported to be a positive contribution of the program that was well received among the youth and community more generally: “…there was this platform of which the YYC initiated…it was an SMS platform so in case you saw any violence you used to text to that number free of charge and it was in partnership with the National Cohesion and Integration Commission. So and all the youth at the village level they used to have that number. So, if you saw any kind of violence or you sense there will be violence you just text direct to that number. So, even those who are maybe thinking of starting a violence they knew there was that number so they were fearing that because there was that number, even we used to wear T-Shirts with those numbers so everybody knew…so that was a very nice, to curb the violence and all that.” [Male County Bunge Member, Central Region] There was general agreement among YYC participants and implementers across the study regions that the YYC program played a role in preaching peace and tolerance most notably during the election period preceding the March 2013 elections. Participants and implementers in Coast, Western, Rift Valley and Nyanza were aware of the role that YYC played in promoting peace and sensitizing people around the issues of tolerance and non-violence. Some of the observations from implementing partners regarding the role of YYC in providing training on conflict prevention, preceding the 2013 elections: Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 219 “Some of the counties in Nyanza like Kisumu, and even Migori and Homabay were considered to be hot spots for violence in the run up to 2013 elections, but because of the peace activities that we engaged the youth in, including the Tuko Rada Peace event and many other activities we engaged in… [we] talked to [the youth] to try to encourage them to embrace…the youth didn’t go out to the streets to riot, as it was expected.” [Female Implementing Partner, Nyanza Region] “We had different trainings. We trained all the, most of the bunges, at least two people per bunge on early warning, early response.” [Female Implementing Partner, Rift Valley Region] A few YYC community members and stakeholders were aware of the peace campaigns that the youth were engaged in. Stakeholders were further able to recognize the role that YYC was playing in quelling tribalism and negative attitudes associated with tribal differences among youth, as one civil society representative from Rift Valley highlighted: “[YYC] is a very good venture where people look at themselves as Kenyans. These youth look at themselves…because they come together from varied backgrounds, ethnic backgrounds. And they come together, they do their theatre, in fact even within what they perform within their theatres which I also like very much in the themes, are about eradicating tribalism. So actually it has really brought together these youth and unmasked them out of the ethnic and tribal identification…” [Male CSO Member, Rift Valley Region] Other stakeholders, specifically police men and women, were not aware of the role that YYC played in changing the youth’s views about violence and negative ethnicity. However, a few Members of the County Assembly (councilors) were aware of bunge activities towards peace building as the below excerpt illustrates: “They [bunge youth] also maintain peace and order, like there is this issue where we had a problem with the security and the groups became like vigilantes. We talked to [bunge youth] in the presence of the OCPD [Officer Commanding Police Division] and they were given that mandate in liaison with the police. This has made security tighter at our place and this is something we are thankful of as people were being mugged frequently. They [bunge youth] are doing this service for free.” [Male Councilor, Rift Valley Region] 6. Self-Efficacy Findings on self-efficacy revealed that there were important challenges facing the youth with regards to their self-esteem and self-empowerment. These were identified to be idleness, alcohol and substance abuse, and involvement in crime and violence. However, the YYC program was valued, among youth and stakeholders alike, for providing youth with an opportunity to not only become involved in positive activities within their communities but also with opportunities to generate income, which as a result, discouraged them from engaging in substance abuse and crime. Perception of the Current Situation Members of the community highlighted key issues facing the youth that directly affected their level of self￾esteem and self-efficacy. The most frequently mentioned issues mentioned with respect to self-efficacy were:  Idleness  Alcohol and substance abuse Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 220  Lack of role models  Crime  Violence These were areas of concern in communities across the country, and it was evident that these challenges were not unique to bunge youth. Both YYC community members and YYC stakeholders across the different regions reported idleness as the most pressing problem affecting the self-confidence of youth, particularly those who had completed their education had not succeeded in securing employment. Idleness was cited as the key reason leading to involvement in crime, violence and substance abuse, as explained by one group of youth in Nairobi: “…you see like in Mobuto that is Kitisuru Ward, there is a lot of idleness in youth...they are not working and they are very idle, so they are involved in crime, drunkardness and other things even in drugs….” [Non-YYC Youth, Nairobi Region] “…they do not believing in themselves that I am a youth, I can do it, I can make it. So that hope is still lacking.” [YYC Community Member, Rift Valley Region] “When I look at the youth, first of all I know youth is a transitional stage and this transitional stage is a stage where somebody can build or destroy his future. During this stage people are very ambitious, they have a lot of energy, they are zealous and because of that ambition when their goals are not met at times they become wild or violent... because they have a lot of energy and if the energy cannot be utilized in the right way then the energy can be mis-used. They also have a lot of zeal, zeal to see things happening and if the right things are not there to make them happy then they can use the same zeal to do bad things… the issue of substance abuse. Actually it’s an issue in the whole of the coastal area as well as other parts of the country. This vice makes us lose focus in our lives.” [Male Religious Leader, Coast Region] “The youth of today in Kenya are really upbeat you cannot compare them with the youth of 2007…youth who were in our age [bracket] in 2007 five years ago, I think it was different, we felt we lost hope and it culminated even in the post-election violence because some of us felt like they were being robbed of victory or their future, but right now I think we are calm, we are peaceful and we are very hopeful of a brighter future.” [Male Councilor, Central Region] Role of the bunge/youth groups Overall, the YYC program was reported to have helped youth with respect to self-efficacy by providing them with opportunities to be active, instead of idle, and subsequently dissuading them from substance abuse. Bunge youth across various regions were particularly active in speaking to their communities and fellow youth about substance abuse, and disseminating information regarding other risks affecting them including HIV. Bunge youth also appreciated the fact that the program allowed them to assume leadership positions, practice public skills and gain personal confidence in general. “I see that is successful because we can respect ourselves, we can learn to respect and appreciate ourselves.” [Female Bunge Leader, Rift Valley Region] “…like we said earlier the youth do not have time to sit by the road side or to join some unworthy groups like the MRC [Mombasa Republican Council’ but when they are in groups like this they get to discuss issues to improve their living standards, they don’t have time to look for bhangi Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 221 [marijuana] and miraa [khat] so the bunges have really helped.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Coast Region] “I had a problem with standing in front of people, I am an actress so I only stand in front of people with a script and another name and another role, I am never me, but when it comes to this point I remember a friend of mine usually noticed I was shaking, I couldn’t even hold a pen I was like let me just sit and talk. So it really helped me to really talk to people and to believe…to see something in myself that I really did not because this people for them to elect me they saw something, so it really helped me to know like I can do, I can do something. I can do anything if I put my mind to it.” [Female National Bunge Member, Central Region] “The first thing is that we appreciate ourselves, you see and may be now participate actively, you know you encourage other youths actually to take part in the barazas or anything else…the campaign added an ingredient that is confidence amongst ourselves and [positive] attitude towards each other, so the campaign helped us so much.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Rift Valley Region] However, some youth did not feel that the program had successfully addressed the issue of improving the esteem and self-confidence of the youth: “I would say no because, if you have not empowered these people economically… self-reliance is about being economically stable. Without you being economically stable you can’t say you’re self￾reliant because you have to rely on someone else to feed you so that one I can say no.” [Male County Bunge Member, Rift Valley Region] “I will say nothing; to me nothing…I will just say they have given us a hint on how you can be independent on yourself, open a small business and live your life.” [Male Bunge Leader, Nairobi Region] However, stakeholders did note and appreciate that the program had contributed to improving the overall outlook of the youth, recognizing as well that bunge youth were also actively imparting the same attitudes to others in the community. “I remember like I ever walked around…Makadara, you find that many young people who’d think of maybe going to do drugs, or maybe smoke stuff, you find maybe they’ll get that particular few coins from the car wash, and you find them that they are responsible, they can buy food, they can go eat good food that is going to make them be good people in the society. So you find from the way they reason, their life style has dramatically changed.” [Male Religious Leader, Nairobi Region] “Yes they are doing entrepreneurship, talent nurturing, youth empowerment into leadership which has really brought a change into their lives. In talent nurturing they are doing behavioral change where they are trying to rehabilitate youths who had become drug addicts.” [Female National CSO Member, Coast Region] “…as I have told you some of them were very arrogant, some of them were rowdy and most of the youth after the program have really changed, you cannot believe they are the ones when you talk to them because I know them when the joined and now that they have joined I have seen a very big difference.” [Female CSO Member, Nairobi Region] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 222 7. Gender Differences in the YYC Program Bunge respondents reported that due to the affirmative action guidelines in place, male and female bunge youth were able to participate and pursue leadership positions equally, even at the county and national levels. Bunge youth recognized and appreciated that female bunge members were entitled to hold leadership positions according to the constitution, and many indicated that these were being pursued by women. “Female [youth] were dominating a lot because they had their own project to empower the ladies…they had their own empowerment project for the women, they were calling it, women mentorship program or something like that.” [IDI0169Central_CountyBungeMember_Female] “Females are more active than men…females, they are more present, they can remind you about the meeting but no man can remind you about the meeting, in fact we have more ladies than men, men are … you know, men they believe they have their parents but us ladies believe we can look after ourselves.” [Female Bunge Leader, Rift Valley Region] “The women are more active than the men. Again YYC has actively participated in growing our group.” [Female Bunge Leader, Western Region] “You will find that now in our group, we have three ladies who at the beginning were underdogs. But now even the county fears them because they have politics and you get that we have empowered them to know their rights. And to know in gender they have equality and in YYC.” [Male Bunge Leader, Western Region] However, several challenges were highlighted with regards to female participation in the YYC program. In some cases, youth reported that young women did not express the same level of interest in bunge activities as did young men. In addition, reports of low confidence and shyness were also used to explain why young women did not always fully engage in bunge activities. Around Coast and Nyanza, key barriers related to sociocultural and religious norms were reported to limit the participation of female youth, and as a result, male youth were more strongly represented in the program at the Coast. Finally, the perception that women were not capable of providing leadership was also thought to hinder female participation in the program. “No, we have a challenge with female youth, I don’t know why. It is hard to see a female stand out and say ‘I want this,’ it is really hard…actually I got so upset because when we were electing the County Board, we are 9 so according to our constitution 3 of us have to be ladies...So there was me, I was a lady, then there was another lady, our treasurer, but then we were lucky another lady…if our constitution did not have that clause there I am very sure like a lot of them would have been men and ladies would have been left out.” [Female National Bunge Member, Central Region] “There are those who say they can’t elect a lady to be the president of the county because of their gender.” [Male Bunge Leader, Rift Valley Region] “It’s the women who shy off because YYC has provided platform they are not ready to grab that opportunity.” [IDI0128Central_Mobilizer01_Male] “Not really, they were not able that is one of the gaps that is not addressed adequately. Each and every group the leadership should have people of the opposed gender like male and female. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 223 When it comes to explaining things and making decision, you find it is the males who are making them. When it comes to meetings of the bunge, you find it is the male who are attending most of the time and not the ladies. We need to address and bridge the gap between the two. This is an issue that they need to address. The females are a bit shy and they don’t come out openly as their male counterparts. It is not as expected but we are hoping that it will change with time.” [FGD0193Coast_Mobilizer02_Male] Implementers also commented on the few numbers of female youth within the program, indicating that this was an area that they are working to improve on. “It’s a cultural thing…they don’t believe that women can lead them. It’s a big problem. And that’s why under the modification that we have with USAID, one of the major things that we are going to do is to do women conferences, and just try to change the thinking of these youthful men in the society to embrace women and realize that they can also lead them.” [IDI0158Nyanza_ImplementingPartner_Female] 8. General Views on Yes Youth Can! Community Awareness of YYC Overall, awareness of the YYC program was mixed within the communities represented across each region. Among community members who were aware of the program, most had heard about it either through friends, relatives or the media. Among stakeholders, the media also reported to have played a role in relaying information about YYC. However, stakeholders also received information about the program from community forums and social sector organizations, such as those in the civil society. Awareness of the YYC program among non-YYC participants was varied. Stakeholders such as religious leaders, police and non-YYC community members were not fully aware of the program, whereas parents and members of the civil society appeared to have more information on the program. Among parents across the study locations, most indicated that they came to learn of the program through their children. A few parents had also come to learn of the program through other community forums where local leaders were involved, while others learned of the program through local media. “YYC I heard it from my children at home when they said their group was about to be funded by YYC project so this project was, was to be launched, it was an American thing, that is what they were and then they were supported by USAID.” [Male Parent, Nyanza Region] “I heard it over the radio and most of them came to teach the youth and also things to do about politicians and they told us to encourage our children to join...” [Female YYC Youth Parent, Western Region] A few stakeholders had not heard about the YYC program. However, while they may not have been familiar with YYC as a program, a few were aware of the bunge youth groups that may have adopted other identifiers such as the ‘Bunge Kwa Vijana’ in Coast province, or the ‘Ni Sisi Chapter’ in Nairobi, not recognizing that these were part and parcel of the same YYC program. “I have never even heard about them [YYC] here in Kikuyu, maybe they are in the capital city.” [Male Religious Leader, Central Region] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 224 “I have not heard of the Yes Youth Can group in Kenya but what I heard is that it’s part of that movement called Bunge Kwa Vijana and I learnt about it through the radio and television.” [Male Policeman, Coast Region] “…there was a function, the chief of our area had called it was a function for the youth so he called different organizations, I remember there was one guy from Yes Youth Can, he said you have to be in a group of youth, they help youths with entrepreneurship or something but you have to be in a group and you have to have a business proposal or something.” [YYC Community Member, Nairobi Region] Most members of the civil society became aware of the program through the media, and through their interactions with other organizations in the social sector. “I heard about YYC when I went to Kilifi. There was this consortium that we working on…with ‘Moving the Goal Post.’ So on that day the Yes Youth Can [program] was being launched there on the ground.” [Female National CSO Member, Coast Region] “I heard about the Yes Youth Can program when USAID was advertising it a lot…this is how we came to know about it and we found out it was a very good idea.” [Female CSO Member, Nairobi Region] Members of Parliament were not fully aware of the YYC program, only have been minimally exposed to it. However, most councilors were well-informed about the program, having either participated in it themselves as bunge youth, through their relationships with youth focused organizations, having worked with youth more closely in their current or previous capacities, and having known about YYC activities in their respective communities: “I have heard about but I have not interacted with them [implementers or participants].” [Male Member of Parliament, Nairobi Region] “I know because we are in the estates [neighborhoods] and there are those youth bunges and one of my brothers is participating in one of those youth bunges and I have been seeing them coming together to do community work.” [Male Council Member, Coast Region] “I heard about this program while I was working with the Youth Agenda, after coming out of Youth Agenda I believe they are the first people to initiate this [program] but they [Youth Agenda] were not the implementers.” [Male Council Member, Nairobi Region] Views of program implementation Mobilizers and bunge leaders were reported to have performed fairly well, however there were a number of issues which were said to have affected their role in implementing the YYC program. Mobilizers faced the challenge of ensuring that groups continued to meet regularly, and also that of reaching youth in the most remote parts of the counties. Bunge leaders, while most served their bunges as expected, were accused of pursuing their personal interests while in their leadership positions. However, the issue of their limited capacity was also highlighted as a challenge that affected their performance as bunge leaders. Views of Mobilizers Among implementers and participants across the regions, mobilizers were found to have played an important role in encouraging the youth to form and register bunge groups and in creating awareness Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 225 among the communities about the program. For the most part, mobilizers were found to have succeeded in their roles, as was reported by implementers, bunge leaders and mobilizers themselves: “The mobilization process was successful, hugely successful because World Vision engaged these mobilizers right from the waver and most of the mobilizers now have youth leaders within the boards, you’ll find that most of the presidents were mobilizers initially, and therefore it means that they were youth leaders within their communities.” [Female Implementing Partner Staff, Nyanza Region] “They [mobilizers] have really, really done a lot with a voluntary spirit, they have mobilized young people to come to their network, they have organized the community to accept the YYC program, they have mobilized the government to understand exactly what is happening, they have gone straight to work with the local administrating and local machinery there. Sincerely speaking these people have really done a lot to make this program at the moment to be very successful.” [Male National Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] “We had one leader who was mobilizing and made sure that we had 136 groups mobilized and registered. Kaloleni had 84. Kilifi had 76, Magarini had 96, and Malindi had 56. That was the target within five months; we were able to do the work.” [Female Mobilizer, Coast Region] “We just interacted with one [mobilizer]… he was the one who mobilized some youth in our [area], phase four is big, some youth came in because of him, he came he talked to them and they came in… he did so well because he has more than fifty bunges who joined the USAID program.” [Female Bunge Leader, Nairobi Region] In one instance, a bunge leader in Western explained that there were no mobilizers in the region, but members of a coordinating committee would instead play the role of mobilizing youth to participate in bunge activities. This was reported to have resulted in poor follow-up, as it was the committee did not always succeed in contacting youth about planned bunge meetings: “[The mobilizers] are not there anymore… but we have something we call CCT which is Community Coordinating Team... after we meet with someone, you ask “why didn’t I see you in the meeting?” and they say they were not called and that is the problem” [Male Bunge Leader, Western Region] However, it was also reported that mobilizers faced a few challenges in their roles. One of these challenges was that mobilizers often found themselves over-extended resource-wise, as they were required to volunteer their time and resources towards activating the program on the ground, sometimes without adequate facilitation. One implementer also weighed in on this issue, noting that mobilizers’ expectations of full time engagement may have not been realistic, considering that their role was envisioned as a voluntary one: “[The mobilizers] were frustrated at certain point…there we are really trying to our level best but still what can we do without funds?” [Male National Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] “So in terms of mobilizers, we have done a lot of training and capacity building but now because... they feel this should be a full time job to them as opposed to volunteering... so it’s quite ...it pulls the program down.” [Male Implementing Partner Staff, Western Region] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 226 Mobilizers in Coast, Rift Valley and Nairobi further reported the challenge of ensuring that groups remained active after they had been successfully registered, indicating that this was difficult for them as mobilizers to control: “The other challenge that we had was sustainability. You can mobilize so many groups but if [they] aren’t meeting regularly then it is a waste of time.” [ Female Mobilizer, Coast Region] Nonetheless, a few participants in Nairobi felt that mobilizers had not mobilized enough youth within these communities, and that there was little awareness about the YYC program as a result. One bunge leader explained that while members of certain wards in Dandora were aware about the YYC program, youth in other wards of the same area did not have any information about YYC. Similarly, it was observed in Rift Valley that mobilizers did not succeed in activating the YYC program in the deep rural areas and that the approach to reaching and communicating with youth was not as well-planned as it should have been: “In my ward, you know in Dandora/ Embakasi North there are five wards, phase one, phase two, phase three, phase four and phase five, in my ward we have like about four groups, four bunges, the others don’t know even what is happening... In my area, I don’t know even who my mobilizer is, so I cannot tell you what his is role, or what he did.” [Male Bunge Leader, Nairobi Region] “But those [mobilizers] in the interior places, they have done nothing.” [IDI0139RiftValley_BungeLeaderFemale01] “I can say in a way [the mobilizers] had a weakness. What they did, let’s say in Nakuru County, they did not sit down to research on the best way they can mobilize youths in this town, they did not sit down to plan they just started and so what happened, if you mobilize and you don’t use the right audience you will not get to everyone. If I stand in town and announce I want the youth, the message may not necessarily reach all the youth because there are those who do not go to town and they will either not get this information, or they will get this information when it is too late, or they will get distorted information. So the strategy with the mobilizers was very poor, they did not sit to look at the best ways to mobilize youth in Nakuru, how we can mobilize them in urban or rural areas.” [Male Bunge Leader, Rift Valley Region] Views on Bunge Leaders YYC participants found that bunge leaders generally performed well, being responsive to the needs of the bunges and also ensuring smooth coordination with program implementers, despite the challenges they faced in motivating their groups (as described in the subsequent section covering implementation challenges): “[Bunge leaders] did well because they went on with their own program like savings and credit, those garbage collection, that one of chicks, growing chicks, the chapters still going on strong.” [Male Mobilizer, Nairobi Region] “The bunge presidents, they did their work by leading the bunges, coming to every meeting when they were contacted. They responded immediately, they did their work, I can give them 90%.” [Female Mobilizer, Nyanza Region] However, there were critiques of bunge leaders’ performance from fellow bunge leaders as well as other participants that were raised in several regions including Nairobi, Western and Rift Valley. Bunge leaders were accused of serving their personal interests, by offering preferential selection to their friends when it Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 227 came to bunge composition as well as benefits, which subsequently compromised the quality of their leadership: “[Bunge leaders] were not successful because... after some time it came to be an individual thing, you hear what they are talking about, what they want to gain from this, not what the youth would gain from the activities, what themselves would gain from the activities so they became selfish, they wanted all for themselves, so it was not a successful thing because when it comes to selfishness nobody will gain apart from yourself. So it was a problem I think the bunge leaders failed miserably.” [Male Mobilizer, Nairobi Region] “…when the youth leaders get money, they just know who is my friend, where is he and can we divide this?” [Male Bunge Leader, Western Region] “There is a time we had a friend, they shifted from their group because their leader…was not involving them… if he has been given a chance to take somebody for a forum, he used to pick only the individual, his best friends, that’s why they shifted to our group.” [Female Bunge Leader, Rift Valley Region] “There are those [leaders] who formed bunges but the members were all relatives – I, my brother, my wife, my cousin etc. – this is what took people back and it reached a point where this affected the program at the beginning.” [Male Bunge Leader, Rift Valley Region] One mobilizer in Rift Valley further commented on the challenges that bunge leaders faced, specifically their limitations with regards to capacity and coordination skills, and the fact that the bunge leaders were not able to traverse the counties to fulfil their duties when need be. In addition, this mobilizer observed that bunge leaders did not perform as well as they should have on their own, often requiring a ‘push’ from the implementing partner to schedule group meetings: “Bunge leaders [did not succeed] to the level that I would have expected them to succeed: one is because of, sometimes their background, their capacity and their coordination … and I don’t blame them sometimes… because coordinating such a program [is challenging], and ideally as much as the implementation was done by Mercy Corps… but to the bigger extent the implementation also should have been coordinated by the [bunge] board, there’s the leadership. But because [the bunge leaders] come from different areas, from one far end of the county to the far end of the county, they just existed there. They were just there, they cannot meet unless Mercy Corps comes and facilitates for them to meet and that would be probably after maybe two months, then they cannot perform.” [Male Mobilizer, Rift Valley Region] In Nairobi, one bunge leader were also faulted the bunge leaders generally for not having enrolled enough youth into the bunges, which may not necessarily have been their role, but was viewed as a shortcoming of the youth leaders: “[Bunge leaders] were not successful because... we didn’t catch all youth in our area.” [Female Bunge Leader, Nairobi Region] Views on Implementing Partners Across the regions, there were varying views about the performance of YYC implementing partners. While participants appreciated the support they received from implementers, they raised key issues around communication, transparency, organization and follow-up across each region. Findings for each of Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 228 the six study locations, with respect to views on implementing partners, are presented throughout the following section. In the Central Region, there were mixed views among bunge participants about the performance of the implementing partner. On the positive end, a few participants appreciated the role that the implementing partner played in mobilizing youth as they launched and rolled out the program, as well as the funding that the agency was able to provide the bunge youth for their activities: “Maybe what I can say is that the [implementing partner]…has played their role because if we needed funds, they contributed.” [Female Bunge Leader, Central Region] “[Implementing partner] mobilized us, we came together, we learnt a lot…” [Male Bunge Leader, Central Region] However, there were a few critiques of the implementing partner which emerged from discussions with participants. The first critique was related to the delivery of information, with a few participants complaining that information was unclear and delayed, and as such youth were not always able to plan accordingly for bunge activities. Furthermore, members also felt that the implementing partner did not employ a communication strategy that was particularly youth friendly. “…you see there is the constituency, the ward, the county, [the implementing partner] is up there so sometimes it becomes a challenge to get information from them… to get the right information from [the partner].” [Female National Bunge Member, Central Region] “They give information but they give you like in a quick mood such an event is happening like on Thursday but they are telling you today…so you know everything requires planning in advance, everything requires that you prepare yourself, because I have my plans.” [Male Mobilizer, Central Region “[The implementing partner’s] leadership style is not friendly because for one, if you want to pass a certain message to youth… [you have] to attract the youth…[they need] to upgrade their communication to the youth… no feedback is gotten from them, there are very many channels they can use…so it shouldn’t take long to communicate from the group to the offices and from the offices back to the group. That’s why I’m saying they need to upgrade their communication.” [Community Service Bunge Member, Central Region] One other complaint came up in discussions with mobilizers, who reported that the implementing partner did not duly pay the venue hire fees required for bunge activities they had planned, but instead expected mobilizers to cater for these fees out of pocket: “The [implementing partner] they also failed us sometimes because…they were telling you to hold an event they’ll come pay for the hall…at the end of the day because the turn out may not be as they expected, you are left with the burden to cater for…maybe because you don’t have money in your pocket, what will you do at the end of the day? You see you are discouraged, the next time you may not be able to work for them.” [Female Mobilizer, Central Region] “They have not successfully played their role because…there is no way they can take me to a trip…then you pay Ksh10,000 and they tell you on the other side pay for the rent of the venue when we hold several activities in the community…” [Male Mobilizer, Central Region] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 229 In the Western Region, the implementing partner received positive remarks from bunge members for supporting the groups in their various activities, as the below excerpts illustrate: “What they did good, is that they came on the ground and gave us direction and we were able to realize ourselves and started projects, which are benefiting us.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Western Region] “I have not experienced any problems with [the implementers]; they are doing some good work.” [Female Bunge Leader, Western Region] However, there were a few critiques of the organization, specifically related to the quality of communication between the implementing partners and the groups. One bunge leader specifically remarked that the partner did not adequately consult bunge members on implementation plans, as she would have expected: “There was this communication breakdown; there might be some information that we as presidents should be given but you find that we were not given…now you find that [the implementing partners] will come and implement something that we are not even aware of. So I think there should be that proper communication.” [Female Bunge Leader, Western Region] “I think to me, [Implementing partner], I have no problem with it…only one thing, they promise but they don't fulfill, that is the only problem but we don't know why. They will promise you they are coming to the ground but you will never see them…” [Male Bunge Leader, Western Region] A representative from the implementing partner acknowledged the communication delays which occurred within their organization, due to the various internal stakeholders who needed to be consulted on a variety of decisions and activities, which subsequently led to delays when communicating with bunge members on the ground: “For implementers we also have restrictions, as we implement from here, [and there is] communication to the headquarters in Washington so the decision making process is slow because they have to understand; maybe the field officer has understood, the director has not understood so the head office will not understand it so we have to go back.” [Male Implementing Partner, Western Region] In the Nyanza Region, there were a few positive remarks about the implementing partner, one of them being the level of engagement that the partner demonstrated when it came to involving the youth in bunge activities: “When [the implementing partner] comes…they normally call people. When they have called us, they tell us what they have come to do, to discuss…I think it is positive.” [Female Mobilizer, Nyanza Region] However, a number of critiques were raised with respect to the implementing partner’s role. One of them was the inadequate presence of the partner on the ground, particularly whereby certain activities had been planned in advance: “…They never visited the group, they just gave money in their offices out there. They called us for seminars but they never visited the groups even after the funding.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Nyanza Region] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 230 “…even last year there was supposed to be a meeting at Chemase which has never taken place, there was a supposed to be a peace meeting at Nyakach on the cattle rustling...because those who are taking the cattle are the Kalenjins from the Luos. So there was supposed to be a peace tournament. The other was Kericho and Sondu, it has not happened, why? Because the implementing partner is not there, there is no money.” [Female Mobilizer, Nyanza Region] In addition, there was a perception that individuals from the implementing agency were drawing personal benefits in their positions within the implementing organization. This sense of perceived corruption tainted the image of the partner among some participants. Similarly, there were also accusations of dishonesty, whereby individuals from the implementing organization were accused of granting bunge grants conditional on kick-backs: “... the idea was actually good but the youth are not benefitting and the beneficiary is now the partner. You [find]…all of a sudden, somebody has bought a house of Ksh5 million, all of a sudden this guy has bought a vehicle, so you wonder, how does he make his money?” [Female Mobilizer, Nyanza Region] “The tender was awarded to the implementing partner. Now the way they were dealing with the groups, they were somehow corrupt …and there are occasions where some members…the implementing partner members, who are sent to us at the village level, you would get one telling you that if you get the grant, you must give us this. We are going to give you [the grant], and you must give us this.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Nyanza Region] “If USAID can work directly with the youth, it will be much easy because key in all the bunges you want to work with, ask the bunges what activities they want to implement, let them present to you, work with them directly. Why do you go through proxies?” [Female Mobilizer, Nyanza Region] Finally, there were allegations that in Nyanza, the implementing partner engaged the popular political coalition CORD (Coalition for Reform and Democracy) in the mobilization activities who did not have a good reputation. This was perceived to be a major interference that further tainted the image of the implementing partner in the view of participants: “We realized CORD has been sub contracted…the project officer …was told by the implementing partner itself ‘we have sub-contracted CORD instead of going to the ground to look for people, let CORD do it for you’…that was very wrong they should change the attitude…. it was a let￾down…they inherited corruption.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Nyanza Region] In the Rift Valley Region, there were a few positive remarks about the implementing partner. The organization was perceived to be both approachable and responsive to the bunge members’ needs: “… we have seen the impact…[the implementing partner ] is the best because they used to assist us youth, even you can feel free talking to them.” [Female Bunge Leader, Rift Valley Region] The perception that the implementing partner was profiting financially from their association with the YYC program also emerged in Rift Valley, as was explained by one bunge leader: “Honestly speaking, I have experienced a very big challenge with implementing partners because, for one, they were in business and I don’t fear saying that. Anyone that is in business will have to magnify things stay in business. It is also an organisation and it wants to stay in the market because one thing that I know, if the program had reached it objective the donor would Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 231 withdraw… So they were buying time and again they were creating some of the problems so that they stay in business. There are those who I can say have tried but the problem of that program was the partners. For example the issue about the grants – they came up with the idea of issuing grants, I have given out a proposal, it has been vetted, passed and booked at the headquarters and issuance of the grant approved but the money is not wired to the account…” [Male Bunge Leader, Rift Valley Region] In addition, one bunge leader also noted that delays in communication owing to the internal chain of command on the implementing partner’s end also affected bunge activities and affected participants’ perceptions of the partner’s performance: “’We are waiting for orders’ - there is a chain of command which does not actually work well in such a forum.” [Male Bunge Leader, Rift Valley Region] In the Coast Region, there was little feedback on the performance of the implementers. Issues that were raised in the Coast region touched on the disconnect between the partner and the beneficiaries on the ground. One mobilizer pointed out failures in communication, demonstrating that the implementers acted in ways prioritized their own interests over the interests of the beneficiaries: “It happened with some of our partners, they would tell us to do this thing today and while in the field, they change their minds and call us to do a different thing. I think they failed because what they were doing was out of their own interest.” [Male Mobilizer, Coast Region] Another critique of the implementers in Coast was that there was poor follow-up with bunge activities, and that there was inadequate consideration of the educational background of youth in the region, who in many cases were illiterate and therefore disadvantaged from participating in all aspects of the program. Techno Serve was identified as one of the agencies that implemented the program in Coast: “Then considering the level of illiteracy in our areas, I think they were too strict. We had also [name] which was an implementing partner. It wasn’t that fast and it was charged with helping the groups with their areas of interest like if you are aligned with the area of saving, they trained you in that. If you are interested in poultry, you be specific. We did two or three programs. What they did was do it yourself but there was no good follow up.” [Male Mobilizer, Coast Region] In the Nairobi Region, participants noted that implementing partners contributed to the YYC program. Implementers were viewed to have been successful for mobilizing support for youth locally and internationally, and also for partially delivering the small grants: “I will say yes [the implementing partners were successful in their role] because now we can see we have people outside Kenya who are supporting Kenyans and youth.” [Female Bunge Leader, Nairobi Region] “For now I can say [the implementing partners] they did a very good job, and USAID because [one implementing partner] came up with these chapters, [another implementing partner] gave them grants, you see that they did a very good job in our area because in our area, I think in Nairobi County, the area I was a mobilizer, many groups got those grants.” [Male Mobilizer, Nairobi Region] However, there were some critiques of the partners. A few participants felt that the implementing partner did not provide dedicated support to the bunges, that the process by which grants were awarded to bunges was not fully transparent, and that funds were not released to bunge groups: Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 232 “[The implementing partner], they just frustrate us…at first when they came they were so real but after some time they were not there…they neglected us… it’s like they were picking different bunges, they were giving them the grants, so as for us they gave us… they gave two groups, two bunges the grants in our constituency and that was so frustrating for the others because we applied for the same but they chose the two groups.” [Male Bunge Leader, Nairobi Region] “I think [the implementing partner] had the funds…but they never relayed them to us, they never released them to us to facilitate us…to manage us, to do our work well on the ground, so it was a problem, a very big problem. So the [the implementing partner] they have a trust issue, so there is a problem…. it has been one year since [the implementing partner] left us without any notice” [Male Mobilizer, Nairobi Region] Views on USAID Across the study locations, there were both positive and negative views regarding the contribution of USAID to the program implementation. Most respondents were aware of USAID’s role in the YYC implementation. However, a few bunge members were not able to clearly distinguish between USAID’s role and the implementing partner’s role: “I have never seen USAID. I know Winrock is USAID, I knew Mercy Corps when I saw it on the plan, I didn’t know it was part of USAID. So us here in Bungoma, if you ask us about USAID, we will tell you USAID is Winrock. So when we see Winrock, we see this is money from USAID, we don't know any other partner apart from Winrock.” [Male Bunge Leader, Western Region] Bunge members across the regions appreciated various aspects of USAID, ranging from the YYC initiative itself to other aspects of the program. Key highlights were the fact that the YYC program was that it succeeded in instilling a sense of peace after the 2007 general elections, it provided the youth with useful information including civic education, networking and self-improvement opportunities: “…we have no problem with USAID, in fact USAID…has really assisted us…they have introduced us to the World Bank Summit… now we are talking about our president leaving this country, our national [bunge] president is leaving this country to the USA, Washington for a peace forum… so they have really done [well].” [Male National Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] “I think USAID is doing something important for us youth because I think USAID is the mother and father to YYC…they were giving us good information…they used to facilitate us telling us good ideas about business, about politics … most of us we did not know anything to do with constitution, but they taught us about our rights.” [Female Bunge Leader, Rift Valley Region] “We didn’t know much but we just knew that [USAID] are going to help us eradicate poverty in our place, at least mobilize youths, talk about… in 2007, the fight which was there, they brought peace, I can say they brought peace.” [Female Bunge Leader, Nairobi Region] However, USAID was also criticized by participants for not following bunge activities closely, making promises which were eventually not delivered to the youth, and also for bureaucracies and delays when it came to responding to program issues, as members from Nairobi and Rift Valley reflected: “He was from USAID... you know the reason as to why I lacked interest is because there was no follow up, and the guy even never came back to tell us what is the way forward. So immediately we switched off, we just gave it black out, that is why I cannot tell you who are the implementers because they implemented nothing.” [Male Council Member, Nairobi Region] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 233 “From the donor USAID, those promises they used to give us, you know they normally give us promises when we are many, after those promises they can’t fulfill those promises.” [Female Bunge Leader, Rift Valley Region] “The delays, the bureaucracies for them to release those funds I think it is too much because … you write a proposal of what you want it, it is then sent to Washington I don’t know New York or where for approval.” [Male County Bunge Member, Rift Valley Region] Overall Views of the Program Overall, the YYC program was reported to have delivered positive outcomes for youth, specifically by providing them a platform for making their voices heard, providing them with the opportunity to interact with youth across the country, to learn various skills, and also to become more confident as individuals and members of their communities. However, there were a variety of challenges that affected the success of the program. These included difficulties in coordination from the donor and implementing partners, leadership and program management issues, and demotivation of bunge members. Despite the challenges, majority of participants felt hat the program was worthwhile and was making a difference in the lives of the youth and their respective communities. Positive comments There were clear benefits and positive contributions made by the YYC program in the view of participating youth and participants. One of the key positives discussions with emerging from the discussions with participants was that YYC allowed youth to trade in their idleness for meaningful activities instead. The most frequently reported positive aspects of the YYC program as far as bunge youth concerned, across each of the regions, were as follows:  Increased unity and solidarity among youth  A valuable platform  Networking opportunities  Opportunities to engage in positive activities Youth particularly appreciated the platform that YYC had provided for them, which distinctly enabled them to take leadership and have their voices heard across the country. They also credited YYC with equipping them with increased confidence, which further enhanced their own self-image including their interactions with others, particularly those holding positions of leadership within the community. Youth were also able to leverage this confidence to source financial support from the government, through local administrators: “In my own assessment it promoted unity among the youth.” [Male Bunge Leader, Nyanza Region] “The campaign added an ingredient that is confidence amongst ourselves and attitude towards each other, so the campaign helped us so much.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Rift Valley Region] “I can quote the Matuga Constituency for example, the Youth Fund had been there for a long time and the youth never accessed it but now they can go and face the District Officer and apply for those funds as you know they are now more courageous…” [Female Implementing Partner Staff Member, Coast Region] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 234 Apart from some of the material benefits, YYC enabled youth to have good standing in the community and also build their networks with other youth across the country: “We are very pleased with the platform. We can now go anywhere, we can lobby for funds, we can look for other stakeholders, we can crisscross here and there and seek for some funds, we can also network, YYC has really helped us to network, you see through the exchange programs, I’m now here today…I will communicate with somebody in Kilifi or Lamu, I will be in position to talk with someone from Garissa, ‘oh what are you doing my brother?’ - so that network, the platform we have been given its very positive.” [Male National Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] “Right now if I go to maybe a place like Kisumu right now or I go to Uasin Gishu or Lamu, I can’t say that I’m stranded because I know a youth group from Lamu or Uasin Gishu. I will just contact them…before YYC I didn’t know people from Uasin Gishu or Kisumu or Mombasa but that network, you know the network…there are so many other youth who were able to connect to each other through the program.” [Male County Bunge Member, Central Region] Youth also mentioned that their involvement in the bunges enabled them to better interact with government mechanisms. While they felt they could seek support from these organs, they however felt that they no longer needed to rely on individual politicians, as they did previously, due to their increased sense of self-empowerment and awareness: “I’m happy because it helped also to bring into some life organizations that are within a certain area. Overall at the moment I feel more close to some government agencies, government organs, more than the way we used to and they look up to us.” [Male Mobilizer, Rift Valley Region] “Yes, youths we can do anything even without politicians like you saw what happened in 2007 /8 general election so then YYC is an organisation that was preaching to youths that they also can even without politicians. Because we were used, we killed each other, property was destroyed, so that came to make youth active because if you are in a group like this and you are busy you can’t go and destroy.” [Community Service Bunge Member, Nyanza Region] Among non-YYC youth, positive perceptions of the YYC program were also held. These were largely related to the aspect of financial grants and overall support for youth, though these respondents were not fully aware of the full scope of benefits associated with the program. “I can say I like the way they are doing it because I have seen they have empowered youths, they have nice training for the young people, they training empowering then they are actually going to give some funds for business and that is another way of boosting economy and youths, I like the way they are doing it.” [Non-YYC Youth, Nairobi Region] “I heard it is a program for helping youths and if you have groups like this for youths it will be easier for the government to help you…the youth can now air their views to the county government, things to do with employment, drugs, things to do with the situation in the county i.e. things like crime in the county and such things.” [YYC Community Member, Coast Region] Among former bunge members, benefits such as increased leadership potential were also mentioned, as well as the opportunity to explore new business ideas and learn new skills. Former bunge members in Nairobi also highlighted the fact that they had received training and learned how to write proposals and business plans during the period when their bunge was active. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 235 “It has given me skills to have integrity, you have to be active as a leader and we also understand that we youth are the future leaders and we are the one who determine the leadership of this county, so we learnt so many things in bunge concerning leadership.” [Dissolved Bunge Member, Western Region] “The projects we were doing, like for my case it was my first time to do them, but the group helped me to know when I plant tomatoes I should do this and not this… personally it helped me to know how to plant tomatoes and I learnt how to market, I mean even know I know what a business is, it really helped me” [Dissolved Bunge Member, Western Region] Challenges/critiques Implementers and Participants Challenges faced by the bunge leaders and members were related to the management of the groups, as well as funding of group activities. The key challenges mentioned by bunge group leaders were as follows:  Demotivation of group members  Incentivization of participants  Decreased membership/attendance  Reduced volunteerism  Inadequate resources Bunge leaders often faced difficulties motivating participants to remain active in the group and inspire them to volunteer their time and energy, without presenting financial incentives to compensate them for their time and efforts. This resulted in members withdrawing from the bunge. Leaders often times were placed in difficult positions of managing the group expectations as they related to the YYC program overall. Many members assumed that they would be financially compensated for participating in the program, and the misconception of “free” funds was perceived to be a major hindrance to program success. Similarly, leaders struggled to raise funds within their groups, as members were not always in a position to make financial contributions towards group activities. Some leaders also spoke of having to manage internal conflicts within the group, in cases whereby goals were not aligned or leadership roles were disputed. “When you call for the meetings you find some are not attending, and when we contribute may be we need some money some are not contribute so the members, so the secretary and the treasurer we find that we are using so much money.” [Female Bunge Leader, Central Region] “By the way we don’t have enough people to participate in what we want to do, because many people will tell you that, they won’t participate because there is no income… there is nothing which they are going to gain in that project that you are going to have.” [Female Bunge Leader, Nairobi Region] “There are many challenges, first the biggest challenge to me as a person is recruiting those guys, getting the youth, putting all the youth in one basket and leading them is another thing… it is so hard to convince a youth to come to the bunge, you will convince him but he doesn’t come. So he is there but he is not active.” [Male Bunge Leader, Western Region] “One of the biggest challenges was very high expectations among the youth, I think many of them joined the program anticipating to get free money…the other challenge was the cancellation of Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 236 the Tahidi Youth Grant, whereby the youth were getting a grant of Ksh40,000 fee and when it was cancelled, when it was gotten rid of, most of the youth were demoralized especially the bunges that didn’t get the grant.” [Female Bunge Leader, Nyanza Region] “As a group, raising funds has been a problem, some of the members are jobless, so raising money has been a problem, some have jobs so, some are present some are absent.” [Male Bunge Leader, Coast Region] According to USAID, a key challenge affecting implementation of the program was difficulties in coordination experienced by the donor and the implementing partners, as each of the implementing partners had diverse implementation approaches across the different regions. This was recorded as a challenge: “Managing all these different partners that have different styles of doing things that receive different mandates from their headquarters wherever there headquarters are, so that becomes a challenge because sometimes you go to one region and is doing so well and you [ask], why can’t this other region replicate the same, but you find that it is not easy because of the different ways and different systems they are using to run the program, that is one big challenge… but there are times when we feel we should be far much more involved because this is a unique program, if you look at how USAID runs their program this is a multi-sectorial or multi-faceted program that needs a lot of dynamism in working so sometimes we feel like you know the partners are really narrow in how they do their work and you wish you could really get more involved in supporting the program but you find there are challenges according to how USAID has awarded the contract” [Female USAID staff member, Nairobi Region] In Western and Coast regions, the low level of education of youth was cited by implementing partners as a challenge, as it inhibited their ability to form constitutions and bylaws within their groups, and to further maintain proper records. A Rift Valley based implementing partner further commented on cultural challenges that impeded implementation, specifically the mobilization of female youth. In Coast region, general insecurity was reported to threaten the success and operations of bunge groups. “…at the end of the day I decided to ask them one by one, why can’t you just right a simple constitution? Then I started asking them, where have you reached educationally and they would say Class 4 and everyone in that meeting had not reached Class 8. There is also less exposure…like when you go to the deep interior and they don’t know that you can go to any office and enquire about the services rendered for the youth, they don’t know because they are not exposed.” [Female Implementing Staff Member, Coast Region] “Another challenge is, there’s this issue of culture in some places, when you go maybe for mentorship to women. Most men don’t like that as in the culture here in Rift Valley in most places. They see as if when you empower that woman it will be a challenge to them; so when you go to some places they cannot allow you. So the only thing you can do is through the, maybe the chiefs and the village elders so that they can get the real concept about the program first.” [Female Implementing Staff Member, Rift Valley] Another important implementation challenge raised among the implementing partners was the leadership structure and approach of the bunge system, whereby bunge leaders are restricted to one year in office based on the current constitution. This was reported to result in high turnover among elected bunge officials, and subsequently disrupted continuity at the bunge leadership level. It was therefore suggested by one implementing partner that alternative governing practices be designed to preserve the leadership Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 237 of the bunge over a longer period of time, for example a board. The sustainability of the program vis a vis the overall duration of the intervention was also an area of concern for implementers, including the donor. “The design of this project is quite fluid they might not depend on it so much, one is the bearing of the office – the tenure of the office bearers is one year so there is high turnover of youth leaders, it’s so high like last time 60% of the leaders were not re-elected back to the office, so that institutional memory is lost, you have to start again with capacity building, so they leave the project in the middle they have to start afresh.” [Male Implementing Staff Member,Western Region] “Yeah, one big challenge is that…this program we are also building a lot of institutions, the Village Bunge, the County Forum, the SACCO, the National Youth Bunge associations; so one of the key things we are doing is institutional development and yet the program is too short and my challenge is if we have envisioned that ultimately we will end up building all these institutions, they would have made the program longer so that we have time to build the capacity in these institutions but otherwise if it ends the way it is designed to end, a few of the institutions will survive so we needed more time like it is only this year that some of the County Bunge forums which are now Community Based Organizations (CBOs) will start handling money so they needed more time to learn the tricks of handling an organization so I feel that is one challenge.” [Female Implementing Staff Member, Nairobi] Bunge members There were several critiques of the program coming from bunge members across all the study locations. The key critiques of the program were:  Grants were not delivered to all bunges  Lack of vetting of bunge groups  Quality of program leadership  Implementers were detached One of the main complaints raised in some parts of Nairobi, Coast, Central and Rift Valley was related to funding. While many bunge groups benefited from the Ksh40,000 grant, a few bunge members across the various regions claimed that the grant that had been promised to bunges was not awarded or was cancelled in some cases. This was particularly disappointing and demotivating for bunge youth as the grants represented an opportunity for them to pursue their economic interests, yet in some cases their expectations were not met. “For example the issue about the grants; they came up with the idea of issuing grants, I have given out a proposal, it has been vetted, passed and booked at the headquarters and issuance of the grant approved but the money is not wired to the account…” [Male Bunge Leader, Rift Valley Region] “…when they said that they are going to give these funds to start their business or business to boost their business, we started following up for that money, so they are just rotation, go to DO [District Officer], DO now tells us to go to Njiru, when you go to Njiru now you are told to go to other place, so it’s just like a game…a circle, when you go there you are told you don’t have this go back, you move from there to another place at the end of it all you give up…” [Other Income￾Generating Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 238 “…to me the biggest disappointment is that when we formed that project we contributed our own money hoping that the grant will come and we will be refunded back our money and here we are.” [Livestock Bunge Member, Rift Valley Region] “…beginning of last year, they told us they are going to support us with a grant of Ksh40,000, many youth came because of that money but now we are being told that we are not going to be given that grant, now many youth are departing from our groups and youth bunges, saying that they came with another vision but they are not doing what they told us they are going to do for us.” [Female Bunge Leader, Nairobi Region] “Another thing they messed [up], they promised to give us a grant then it failed so most of the youth felt that it favored some groups and we were left out because every time you communicate they just give promises.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Western Region] In Nyanza, Western and Rift Valley, lack of vetting of youth groups was flagged as a problematic issue in program implementation and allegations of ‘ghost groups’ were reported. Some bunge members questioned the selection criteria used to recruit bunges into the program, and the level of due diligence that was conducted on individuals as well as groups on the whole. This was further corroborated by an implementing partner in the Western region, who reported that non-genuine groups were identified during the initial application process. Among bunge members, there were further allegations of corruption and favouritism, whereby bunge leaders and officials were accused of granting benefits and opportunities to relatives over others, misappropriating bunge funds, and even conducting elections for bunge leadership positions in an unfair manner. These issues resulted in disappointment with the bunge system for some youth. “We are saying they were unforeseen and unseen even now for instance you cannot prove that the lady is 46 years and not 27 as stated. You cannot prove that this people you gave grants for Ksh40,000 are the same we have a case where one gentleman that has different signatories, we have an experience where someone received Ksh120,000 and he spent around Ksh12,000 only.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Nyanza Region] “But if YYC could stick to the vision [by] helping the youth, by identifying the real bunges from the ghost bunges because there are ghost bunges.” [Male Bunge Leader, Western Region] “Then anybody could come from a forest and pay Ksh1500, form a group then apply for the grant and those going to vet the groups applying for the grant are those people elected to come up with a financial review committee. If I am the bunge president I would select my person and he would make groups of my choice qualify. Ghost groups qualified groups that existed before...” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Nyanza Region] “…some [bunges] would be formed just for the sake of meeting the targets, so that is the problem, but when you go to the ground, they’re actually not there…and once the targets have been met, that’s the end of it.” [Male Mobilizer, Rift Valley Region] “…there is a time we proposed for advocacy for drugs, for educating people about drugs, but the idea was used by a ghost group, a group that is not working; a few people. 3 people they say that they are doing some group but they are not… those groups that are not in existence, they are overruling us people who are existing and doing something in our lives.” [Female Bunge Leader, Rift Valley Region] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 239 A few bunge members also expressed dissatisfaction with the leadership of the YYC program and implementing partners, claiming that they were not in touch with the issues on the ground, did not communicate frequently enough, did not provide adequate support to youth groups and rarely made visits to the bunge groups, if at all. Also, some bunge members complained that changes in leadership were not communicated to the bunge groups. “I think even the leadership of the group I don’t see if this bunges have a good leadership, at a time you will hear that so and so is no longer in office I don’t know he was corrupt and was stopped from working so we don’t trust the leadership that they have.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Coast Region] “It’s like we can meet with you today and it seems the first time we met and last time we met, you see it’s like sometimes you feel like you are forgotten because there is too much silence… when they went back to office, they keep too much silence, it’s up to you, it’s like it’s up to us to call them, it’s up to us to tell them you see, I think the silence.” [Social Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] “…from the donor USAID, those promises they used to give us, you know they normally give us promises when we are many, after those promises they can’t fulfill those promises.” [Female Bunge Leader, Rift Valley Region] “Mostly we were disappointed because they promised they will be coming on and off but they came a few times…very short term.” [Table Banking Bunge Leader, Central Region] “I think YYC and Mercy Corps…are very good policy makers but they are poor in implementation. Because for one if you come and teach me how to start a business and I’m telling you my problem is not even starting the business because I have the idea in my mind I need funds, I need money either maybe start-up capital or maybe to build up more stock. If you don’t give me this and you have trained me, where have you left me? Have you made me realize the vision that made me come to you? So, I think YYC, Mercy Cops they are just very good policy makers, very good in lecturing but we need to sensitize them that we need them to do much more. We need funds, well on the side of the technical, maybe technical assistance, we want them to be more rounded than they are right now.” [Community Service Bunge Member, Central Region] Some of the other critiques of the program that were mentioned, though less frequently, were as follows:  Inadequate resources overall  Inadequate support and guidance from implementers  The program was not complementary to government initiatives  The program is ‘dormant’ or inactive Non-Bunge Youth Among non-bunge youth, there was little awareness or critique on program challenges. However, one group in the Western region did raise the issue of geographic reach, suggesting that the YYC program needs to focus its efforts on targeting the rural population, rather than the urban. In addition, the same group of youth were also aware of challenges likely to affect their participation in a self-help group, particularly as it related to raising funds. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 240 “Instead of them calling meeting in the hall, I can suggest they come here to the grassroots and they know our problems here instead of calling us to town.” [Non-YYC Youth, Western Region] “Also you know things for youths like our where we say we will contribute money this day, okay you know that is your money you have contributed together with others, you will find there are some youth who cannot afford that money because of how they live and what he does so you will find to get that Ksh300 you have strained so if you strain today, tomorrow and day after tomorrow you feel ‘no I can’t make it’ and he withdrew from the group and it’s not that he wants to but due to lack of money.” [Non-YYC Youth, Western Region] Dissolved Bunge Youth The key challenges that were captured from the dissolved bunge youth leading to their disbanding were the lack of capital for small business activities and lack of financial resources to facilitate their participation in the group’s activities. Youth in Nairobi admitted that they did not have the patience to sustain their bunge groups, and that their expectations for free funds may have been unrealistic and misguided. However, they felt that they lost morale as they did not receive adequate financial, technical or moral support from the implementing partners. Meanwhile, youth from dissolved bunges in Western felt that their participation in the bunge could not be considered a high priority, neither could they rely on financial support from parents for bunge-related activities, in light of other important needs such as education. While these youth cited their enrollment into colleges as the key reason for the dissolution of their bunge, they also reported lacking the requisite training and resources to proceed with their farming projects, for example poultry and greenhouse farming. Youth felt that this training would have better equipped them to maintain the income generating activities within the bunge. Furthermore, there was a perception that the YYC program was highly politicized and that politicians used the program to take advantage of the youth. “They are those who joined colleges, others were transferred from this place to other places... like you know for us youth we are usually impatient, you find we say let’s invest somewhere after a short period of time it will help, so some became, impatient because in that bunge there was no grants or even loans so they felt like they are wasting time and they left.” [Dissolved Bunge Member, Western Region] “Many youth had goals that were rushed, many formed groups in Eastlands, those are the ones who wanted to attend meetings and get allowances, this ended up creating a problem for other youth.” [Dissolved Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] “…we lacked knowledge and directive because when some of us went out everything went down… we didn’t get much information… if they are able they can give us support and capital so that we can revive the projects we had… in addition they tell us how they work, their structure of operation, their work plans so that we understand, so they [can] give us directives like in training…” [Dissolved Bunge Member, Western Region] “We started to get bored because we were not busy…however, what made us youth lose morale, there are some groups that received the grants, one by one, but there are some groups that did not receive any grants like those in Kangemi, I think two groups received a grant…if you went to Dandora, one group also received a grant, but others did not.” [Dissolved Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] “The politicians used these forums to benefit themselves so actually the Ni Sisi created a platform for the politicians…if you look at that it’s only those tycoons in terms of politics who offered us that Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 241 initiative. But our agenda was to upgrade some of our own people through the Ni Sisi chapter but if you look at it, you realize that the politicians are the ones who took advantage of the youth who were there at the time.” [Dissolved Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] Recommendations for improvement to the program Implementers, Stakeholders and Participants Implementers, stakeholders and participants each had relatively similar views about how the YYC program could be improved. Generally, recommendations to improve the five pillars of the YYC program touched on sustaining support towards empowering youth economically, including suggestions for increased funds and disbursement of grants at the bunge level. “What I could say is they would have given us loans now to build up our group because…you know when you have something and you are being told you will get it back, you’ll be stronger… apart from the grants…now they should come up with loans…like the garbage collectors, transport is very difficult for them, so if they have a loan, they would be able to even buy a pickup and have their garbage out of their area.” [Male Mobilizer, Nairobi Region] “I think they [bunge youth] should be given more grants so that they can make more progress because most of them have no jobs, they depend on this only and sometimes you will find that there are 15 to 20 people and they only depend on the charcoal [business].” [ Female YYC Youth Parent, Coast Region] In addition, recommendations across regions covered issues related to youth empowerment, encouraging youth to pursue leadership opportunities, as well as improve their civic education and increase their level of civic engagement, particularly among female youth. “I think we need to do more civic education to our female youth…we need to cultivate seriousness in our youth to garner for elective positions. I believe having 20 youth in leadership positions will change the image of our politics. We need to actually implant into these YYC members, some leadership…I mean they should be thirsty for leadership. They should not remain entertainers forever...we need to empower them.” [Male CSO Member, Rift Valley Region] In addition, recommendations for increased capacity building, education, and skills development were also proposed as important focus areas for the YYC program going forward. One of the recommended training areas was on financial management and discipline, particularly among YYC grantees. “You can find even in Eastlands, especially Dandora, the schools for art, the schools for talents, sports academy are not there. So that is the issue …they [YYC] should…bring those facilities closer to the youth, so that we can compete even with the other countries because of the skills, the skills…we don’t have them.” [Other Income-Generating Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] “What should be done better is I think our youth need capacity building over various issues they undertake because like now…maybe they are to [receive] some money as grants or maybe as loans or such facilities. They need to be capacity building in various aspects…on how to look at their books of accounts after they’ve been given money, how to balance their books and then they also need financial discipline, how they can handle their money repeatedly and make good choices.” [Male YYC Youth Parent, Nyanza Region] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 242 The following are other key recommendations that were proposed for the improvement of the YYC program by implementers, stakeholders and participants:  Needs assessment / mapping  Dedicated support to bunges  Increased sustainability  Improved visibility and awareness  Continuous monitoring  More youth driven  Improved alignment with government initiatives  Improved cohesion and partnership among implementers Geographic scope and reach One of the recurring recommendations was for the program to increase its reach (penetration) in rural areas, as youth in those areas are most marginalized in terms of opportunities and access to information. It was proposed that the YYC make a more deliberate effort to target youth in rural and isolated areas, as they are likely to benefit significantly from youth empowerment activities. Furthermore, it was recommended that the program expand into other parts of the country that may not yet be participating in the bunge system. “They never go to the rural area. And they should change the lifestyle of the same, same people. … tell them to go round, they should not be dealing in town and this is not the problem with the USAID itself, face the problem with all the youth that comes around. They never think about them those in the deep rural areas…” [Female CSO Member, Central Region] Needs assessment / mapping The idea of carrying out a scoping or mapping exercise across the different geographies was proposed. This was viewed as an important activity for pinpointing specific youth needs and experiences that may differ by location and subsequently inform YYC activities. The mapping exercise would also enable the program to identify other interventions or players conducting similar activities, so as to either leverage on these, or avoid duplicating efforts. “Yes, one they could have improved the YYC if they first of all hey started by mapping at the grassroots level. First of all to understand the challenges because as much as we are in Nairobi or in Kenya every area has its own different types of challenges, lets come to Westlands, Westlands has a challenge that people do not see…so if a proper mapping could have been done at grassroot level and they could have understood the challenges then it could be easier for them to know who they are talking to…and then it could be a down to up approach rather than an up to down approach.” [Female CSO Member, Nairobi Region] “I think this potential is to have tailor made programs that are able to meet the needs of the youth because what we have is that the youth in the urban areas and the youth in the rural areas go through different experiences and challenges and the needs of the youths in urban might not be the needs of the youths in the rural areas. Also the needs of one part of town let’s say the coastal strip can never be the same as the needs of the youth of North Eastern province because of the background and environment. So what I’m saying is that there should be tailor made programs Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 243 and it’s important that a research should be done to understand what the challenges which face the youth.” [Male Religious Leader, Coast Region] Dedicated support Findings from the evaluation also suggest that there is need for enhanced technical and moral support to the bunges. Mentorship was also recommended for individual youth as well as bunge groups, for specific and continuous guidance particularly on business practices and financial management of their small business activities. Youth reported that they would benefit from constant motivation, ideally from experienced professionals, in order to gradually succeed in their various endeavors as bunge members and as individuals. “They need more support in management of the groups. Like I said, management of funds is a problem.” [Female Mobilizer, Coast Region] “I will say this, this is a very great program but I think we should have good implementers whereby when you take the program, take the young people, train them. Do not leave them at the infancy stage, most of these programs have been started, have been initiated but after taking the young people they leave them at the infancy stage.” [Male Council Member, Nairobi] “I think we also need some sort professional guidance. We need to employ people who must guide them [bunge youth] on what to do….each group needs to have some professional advisor attached to it.” [Male CSO Member, Rift Valley] Continuous monitoring A key critique of the YYC program was that the implementers were not in touch with the current realities as well as needs on the ground. As such, implementers were implored to ensure that continuous monitoring and support is awarded to bunge youth. This included recommendations for frequent visits to the field and to the actual bunges by implementing partners and donors to assess the needs of the youth as well as document the progress of bunges on a frequent basis: “…people should do follow-ups because I can say that the bunges are just running on their own, there are no reports…development status…there is no proper follow-up mechanism.” [Male Council Member, Coast Region] “…I can say they have to follow up, they have to come close to the youths, they have to do it even if the NGOs [are] there…but they must be following on what is going on in their program.” [Male Bunge Leader, Central Region] “Regular communication, follow ups…to find out what bunges are doing...physically not by phone.” [Agriculture Bunge Member, Western Region] “What I think they should do differently is visit groups individually.” [Female Bunge Leader, Western Region] “We don’t deal directly with USAID, neither does the board deal directly with USAID. So, in future if we would have more of … let’s say a working group or something like that so that periodically… Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 244 these different arms meet to just talk about how the program is going.” [Male Mobilizer, Rift Valley Region] Improved sustainability In addition, participants and stakeholders proposed for the program to initiate larger and longer term projects, with potential for prolonged, sustainable impact. Another strong recommendation was for the program to align itself with the Vision 2030 document, which details the vision for youth and development. One stakeholder found that this was critical in ensuring the sustainability of the YYC in the long term: “I think they need to come down and look for a better approach get the people involved and know the needs of the people. They should come up with projects that are sustainable. Their project is sustainable but they should come up with a better approach.” [Female National CSO, Coast Region] “Maybe what they could have done better is to empower the youth at the start of the program…on how to sustain themselves at the initial point rather than to wait until the last minute to tell them now you are on your own the donors are going…but if they could have done that periodically, systematically…what they should have done is to train the youths to sustain themselves” [Male County Bunge Member, Central Region] “…for sustainability purposes you need to look at things like Vision 2030 for example, the YYC train talks very little about Vision 2030, yet this is the blue print of the government... because at the end of the day is it sustainable? Are they going to sustain it that way? It’s not… in my opinion I’m telling you that at some point, by the way that’s why it’s called a program, at some point it will stop.” [Male National CSO Member, Nairobi] Increased visibility and awareness Improved advocacy, awareness and communication about the program among communities was further thought to be vital to the success of the program. To this effect, improving visibility and awareness of the program among the general population was recommended: “You know when YYC started, it really you hit the road running. There were wide campaigns about YYC. Everything I mean everybody would talk about it. Somehow along the line, that branding, it’s not actually in the public domain as well…We need to talk about it more and more. It was on TV, [but] I have never seen it for the last like one year.” [Male CSO Member, Rift Valley Region] “Just talk to the community and be open because when they come they only talk to the leaders and some members then they go, so the community they don’t have any idea [about YYC].” [Male Bunge Leader, Nairobi Region] “Let the program advertise in the print media and electronic media so that enough attention and coverage is given to it and if possible let other organizations come into partnership with the program so as to develop the youth in a more sustainable way.” [Male YYC Youth Parent, Coast Region] Youth driven Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex v: Final Qualitative Report: Yes Youth Can! Endline Evaluation | Page 245 The recommendation to allow for the YYC program to be fully youth-owned and driven was further propose. Youth viewed this as an essential aspect impacting on the sustainability of both the program and its outcomes. This recommendation was specifically addressed to the YYC partners and implementers, who were encouraged to entrust the youth with the responsibility of taking over, after they have benefited from the capacity building and leadership training via the YYC program. “It’s high time [for] these partners [to] hear that these youth in YYC program - we have done all the training, we have gotten all the capacity building, we are now well established, we have a structure, we have a strategic plan for that and I can inform you at least we are okay… they should trust us…we need this thing to be youth owned, youth managed... they have done their part but now it’s [time] they leave the youth to run it on their own.” [Male National Bunge Member, Nairobi Region] Improve complementarity with government initiatives Finally, the recommendation to ensure that the program is aligned to the current government initiatives for the youth was also proposed. This was made with the understanding that there is an existing blueprint for development in the country, and that there are similar initiatives in place. As such, the YYC program should look to complement the government, rather than duplicate or compete with initiatives of a similar nature that are government-driven, and more long-term in that regard. “Perhaps the YYC concept should actually be mainstreamed into what the government is doing without necessarily giving government money…look at all the interventions the government is doing, there are several interventions…Youth Fund, Youth Fund is an intervention towards credit access, Uwezo Fund is still the same…the Yes Youth Can program, that money in my opinion, it went to do some things the government was already doing.” [Male National CSO Member, Nairobi] Similarly, one recommendation by a Member of Parliament suggested that the program should work towards engaging more political leaders in YYC activities, as a means of providing increased government support to the program. “I think more needs to be done in engaging elected leaders in YYC activities, I think very little is being done in that regard. We hear about YYC from the sides but they don’t engage us directly and I think we have a role to play in that.” [Male Member of Parliament, Nairobi Region] Improve cohesion and partnership among implementers Finally, it was recommended that communication among implementing partners and program stakeholders be improved. This was intended to enhance relationships between the implementers and the boards at bunge levels, for smoother and more effective implementation of the program. “I would have wished there was more connection between the implementers, that is Mercy Corps, and the board.” [Male Mobilizer, Rift Valley Region] Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex vi: Technical Report USAID ‘Yes Youth Can’ Endline Evaluation | Page 246 ANNEX VI. TECHNICAL REPORT USAID ‘YES YOUTH CAN’ ENDLINE EVALUATION Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex vi: Technical Report USAID ‘Yes Youth Can’ Endline Evaluation | Page 247 Technical Report USAID ‘Yes Youth Can’ Endline Evaluation Submitted to; NORC By TNS RMS East Africa Limited March, 2014 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex vi: Technical Report USAID ‘Yes Youth Can’ Endline Evaluation | Page 248 DATA COLLECTION PROCESS Quantitative Data Collection Both qualitative data and quantitative data were collected for the evaluation. The quantitative data consisted of survey data, under three distinct categories: (1) surveys of bunge leaders, (2) surveys of bunge members, and (3) surveys of non-bunge youth, i.e. the control group.. Sampling: For the baseline bunge leader and member surveys, NORC provided our local data collection partner TNS Global with a sample of 670 bunges that were selected from comprehensive lists of bunges received from the implementing partners (IPs). For each bunge, the sample included the bunge name, locating information such as region and village, and the name and phone number(s) of the bunge leader(s). TNS team leaders located a bunge leader (a chairperson, vice-chairperson, secretary, or treasurer) and interviewed him or her. Part of this interview included generating a list of all bunge members, after which 10 bunge members were randomly selected to be interviewed using a skip interval. For both the bunge leader and member surveys, a minimum of three contact attempts were required before a replacement was used. Replacement bunges were provided to TNS by NORC, and replacements were made based on proximity to the bunge being replaced. Bunge members were replaced by randomly selecting additional respondents within the same bunge. For both leader and member endline surveys, TNS interviewers contacted the same respondents that were interviewed in the baseline. For the bunge leader surveys, if the leadership of the bunge changed, the new leader was interviewed (since it was bunge level information we were primarily interested in, and not information related to the individuals themselves). For the bunge member surveys, however, the exact same respondent from the baseline was required, and every effort was made (up to five contact attempts) to find the respondent; if the same respondent was unwilling to be interviewed or was not able to be located, they were not replaced but were dropped from the study. Training and Data Collection. A total of 130 field personnel and 36 people from the Quality Control team were trained on the endline survey in Nairobi from November 5-7, 2013. Following the training, a pilot test was carried out with 7 bunges on November 9th in the teams’ respective regions. Field work commenced on November 11, 2013 ended on February 8th, 2014. Data collection was done using Computer Aided Personal Interviewing (CAPI). The final questionnaire was scripted into SODA software and programmed into the company PDAs (Android mobile phones). Each enumerator was issued with a programmed PDA. Team Structure Survey fieldwork was carried out by five regional teams. Teams were comprised of 4 enumerators on average, supervised by a team leader. Team leaders reported to their respective regional supervisors Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex vi: Technical Report USAID ‘Yes Youth Can’ Endline Evaluation | Page 249 Table 1: Team Structure Region Regional Supervisor Team Leader Interviewers Total Nairobi/Central 1 4 15 20 Nyanza/Western 1 9 48 58 Nakuru 1 3 11 15 Eldoret 1 3 8 12 Coast 1 4 19 24 Total 5 23 101 129 Enumerators were required to carry out the following tasks:  Completing the YYC surveys and managing the case load so that all appropriate individuals are surveyed in the allotted time. Enumerators were responsible for 3 cases per day. In total, enumerators were responsible for 150 interviews each  Gaining the cooperation of the respondent and convincing those who are reluctant to participate. The respondents were assured of anonymity  Ensure questions were understood by respondents. The interviewers clarified the question if they believed the response indicated misunderstanding. If necessary, the enumerator edited the response. Quality control at the program level restricted the number of questions that could be corrected to a maximum of five questions.  Documenting the status of particular cases and assigning disposition codes  Routine communication, with the supervisor to report progress on the assignment, set goals, and discuss strategies in approaching difficult cases  Accommodating respondents Team leaders were responsible for the following:  Providing continued training to enumerators and ensuring the quality of the survey  Assisting in locating respondents in the YYC areas and non-YYC areas  Ensuring that daily data collection activities run smoothly  Tracking and reporting on field progress and issues and helping enumerators to solve any problems in locating listed villages, with understanding the concepts in the questionnaire or with difficult respondents  Observing interviews to ensure that they are properly administered Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex vi: Technical Report USAID ‘Yes Youth Can’ Endline Evaluation | Page 250  Meeting with enumerators on a regular basis to discuss performance Regional supervisors were responsible for the overall management of survey logistics, administration and quality assurance. Quality Control Quality control began during the enumerator training: all enumerators were trained to familiarize themselves with the survey and all of its procedures. Each enumerator was required to complete several practice mock interviews at training before going out into the field. While fieldwork was ongoing, data was reviewed regularly by field supervisors and project executives, in order to check for completeness and accuracy. In addition, an independent quality control team was tasked to conducts independent back checks and accompaniments that constituted at least 10% of all the work in all regions. During the accompaniments, QC clerks were required to listen in and key in responses on her/his PDA. QC clerks were required to ensure the right responses were captured and that all questions were asked and in the right way as well as skip patterns were adhered to. The clerk would correct any anomalies instantly or/and before data is synchronized. The QC would then advise the interviewer whenever errors were noted, and how these could be corrected. During the back-checks, the QC clerk would receive contact information of respondents who had already been interviewed. Whether telephonic or in person, the QC clerk would use a template to record responses as given by the respondent. Among other things, the QC clerk would confirm, first, that the interview was indeed conducted and second that the responses marked in the data match with what the respondent replied. The breakdown of quality control achievements is found in the table below: Tabel 2: QC breakdown Accompaniments Team leaders 5% QC clerks 5% Supervisors 1% Back-checks QC clerks; via telephone 2% QC clerks; direct and personal contact 3% Spot checks Project executives 1% *note: the percents are calculated as a percent of all 10,253 contact attempts, not just as a percent of successful interviews. This ensured that interviewers were making the attempts and that the dispositions recorded were correct. In addition to the 10% total back checks and accompaniments by the QC team, quality checks were also conducted by team leaders, field supervisors and project executives, amounting to 7%. In total, TNS staff back-checked a total of 1,888 interviews, attaining over 17% in total, surpassing the 10% target. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex vi: Technical Report USAID ‘Yes Youth Can’ Endline Evaluation | Page 251 Survey Data: Data collectors were able to complete successful interviews with the leaders of 85% of the bunges interviewed at baseline (recall the exact same leader does not have to be interviewed, rather the current leadership of the bunge suffices). Among baseline bunge youth respondents 72% of members were successfully interviewed at endline and 61% of non-members, as shown below. Table 3: Baseline vs. endline interviews completed (% is of baseline) Interview type Baseline Endline Bunge leader surveys 667 569 (85%) Bunge member surveys 6,370 4,581 (72%) Non-bunge member surveys 3,216 1,969 (61%) Total 10,253 7,119 (70%) 87% of baseline bunge youth respondents were located at endline, and of those, approximately 79% were successfully interviewed, resulting in a final success rate of 69% for all youth (the rate was higher for members (72%) than non-members (61%), as shown in Table 2, above). Less than 5% of the respondents (including leaders) that were contacted directly refused to be interviewed, and nearly all interviews that were started were completed. Less than 5% of the respondents (including leaders) that were contacted directly refused to be interviewed, and nearly all interviews that were started were completed. Enumerators contacted respondents via telephone to schedule an appointment for a face to face interview with the respondent at a later date. Disposition codes were entered for every contact attempt made by the enumerator. TNS made 5 attempts at tracing the same individuals within 3 days. Calls were rotated across days of the week and time of day to increase the success rate. The major reason for non-participation was the fact that the target population (youth) are highly mobile and quite busy. The majority of these youth are under- employed and have to engage in several economic activities such as selling wares along the roads, running small businesses such as kiosks, and farm labor. Others are busy seeking employment. At the same time, some of the respondents changed residency and could not be traced while others could not be reached through the phone numbers registered at baseline and no alternative contacts were given. Table 3 summarizes the reasons for unsuccessful interviews: Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex vi: Technical Report USAID ‘Yes Youth Can’ Endline Evaluation | Page 252 Table 4: Reasons for Unsuccessful Interviews Leaders As % of Baseline Youth As % of Baseline Impossible to contact 27 4% 1274 13% Impossible to interview￾includes: 47 7% 1182 12% Away for extended time 3 0% 206 2% Ill 5 1% 103 1% Not at home 11 2% 256 3% Moved 3 0% 239 2% Refusal 25 4% 378 4% Communication Problems 3 0% 31 0% Respondent did not turn up for interview 5 1% 134 1% Incomplete interview 4 1% 36 0% Postponed 10 1% 102 1% Other 2 0% 277 3% TOTAL UNSUCCESSFUL 98 15% 3,036 31% Qualitative Data Collection As in the baseline study, qualitative data was collected in order to obtain a deeper understanding of the experiences, views and perceptions of study participants. In addition, qualitative findings were used to address any gaps arising from the quantitative phase of the research through triangulation. Two methods were employed for the qualitative component of the YYC end line, specifically Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and Key Informant Interviews (IDIs). FGDs were conducted with bunge groups (based on bunge activities), community members, youth in non￾YYC groups, and members of dissolved bunges (Table 4). For the qualitative phase, data collection commenced on January 6th 2014 and was completed on January 24th, 2014. A total of 48 FGDs were completed across the 6 study regions, outlined in the table below. Table 4: Sampling distribution for Focus Group Discussions Bunges Community Control Dissolved Total Agriculture Livestock Other Income Table banking Comm. service Social Arts Community Members Non YYC Youth Dissolved Bunges Central 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 5 Coast 2 2 1 0 1 0 1 1 8 Nairobi 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 6 Nyanza 5 5 0 1 1 0 1 13 Rift Valley 4 2 0 1 1 0 1 9 Western 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 7 Total 13 11 2 4 5 1 6 4 2 48 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex vi: Technical Report USAID ‘Yes Youth Can’ Endline Evaluation | Page 253 In depth interviews (IDIs) were conducted with a variety of YYC participants and implementers, including bunge members at the local, county, and national level, mobilizers, and implementing agencies. Broader stakeholders including religious leaders, representatives of civil society organizations, police and parents of YYC youth were also captured in the in-depth interviews. A total of 98 IDIs were completed across the sample (Table 5). Table 5: Sampling distribution for In-depth interviews YYC participants and implementers # of respondents Bunge leaders, male 2 per province 12 Bunge leaders, female 2 per province 12 Members of county bunge 4 Members of national bunge 4 Implementing partner staff, key decision-makers 1 per province 6 Mobilizers 2 per province 12 USAID staff (to be discussed with USAID) 2 Broader YYC stakeholders # of respondents Religious Leaders 1 per province 6 Government officials: Councilors 2 per province 12 Government officials: Members of Parliament 2 Police 1 per province 6 Parents of participating youth 2 per province 12 Representatives of civil society organizations - local 1 per province 6 Representatives of civil society organizations - national organizations related to youth, non-violence, and/or democracy 4 Field Obstacles. During the course of endline data collection, obstacles arose. Below, we identify the most significant obstacles faced and the steps taken by NORC and TNS to address them. The bunge leader refused to be interviewed. Some bunges, especially in Nyanza and Coastal regions, initially refused to participate in the survey and also told their members to refuse. In some cases, the country president had even advised bunges not to participate. To facilitate the survey process, NORC contacted USAID, who in turn got in touch with their implementing partners (IPs), who were able to speak with their bunges or appropriate county leadership to facilitate participation. TNS regional supervisors then reached out to IPs to make sure the facilitation was going well. Finally, TNS interviewers were able to re-contact the problematic bunges and successfully interview nearly all of them. The field team was unable to contact the respondent. The main challenge was in reaching respondents on the phone. Some of the respondents changed their contact numbers from those collected at baseline. In the rural areas, the majority of households are off-grid (not connected to electricity) and often have to charge their phones at local shopping centers. Their phones are switched off most of the day to save on battery charge hence making it difficult to contact them. Interviewers often had to make several attempts at calling, or talk to neighbors or co-workers to physically locate respondents. The bunge leader said that the bunge had dissolved. A replacement bunge was NOT selected; the bunge was dropped. However, this was rare. Scheduling. For the qualitative research, the teams experienced a few challenges in recruiting participants of higher profile such as members of parliament and members of the county assembly due to their schedules. There were also several last minute cancellations of appointments by some of the respondents. Despite the challenges, the team was able to complete 98 interviews out the 100 targeted. Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex vii: Evaluation Methods | Page 254 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex vii: Evaluation Methods | Page 255 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex viii: Full Set of Econometric Results | Page 256 ANNEX VIII. ECONOMETRIC RESULTS Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex viii: Full Set of Econometric Results | Page 257 VARIABLES pac_disc pac_mtg pac_org pac_dem pac_vio pemp_comp pemp_ser pemp_acc pcon_lgc Treatment effect: Treated x Round 2 -0.0147 0.0471 0.00973 -0.00895 0.0290 -0.0440 -0.115** 0.00930 -0.0372 (0.0633) (0.0651) (0.0728) (0.0722) (0.0968) (0.0597) (0.0501) (0.0534) (0.0531) Age 0.00475 0.0211*** 0.00714** -0.00673* -0.00581 0.00495* -0.00290 0.00105 0.0109*** (0.00298) (0.00290) (0.00318) (0.00357) (0.00493) (0.00296) (0.00244) (0.00261) (0.00268) Female -0.411*** -0.174*** -0.110*** -0.187*** -0.0439 -0.0119 -0.0134 -0.148*** -0.322*** (0.0361) (0.0355) (0.0380) (0.0412) (0.0573) (0.0348) (0.0287) (0.0304) (0.0322) Education: completed primary 0.207*** 0.0495 0.111** 0.0706 -0.163** 0.122*** 0.0302 0.0705* 0.0805** (0.0447) (0.0423) (0.0474) (0.0544) (0.0734) (0.0431) (0.0360) (0.0381) (0.0407) Education: completed secondary 0.131*** 0.0345 0.0535 0.0943** -0.00339 0.0786** 0.0772*** 0.0333 0.191*** (0.0319) (0.0322) (0.0347) (0.0373) (0.0532) (0.0326) (0.0268) (0.0282) (0.0291) Migrated 0.108** 0.127** 0.102* -0.0137 0.110 -0.0484 0.0761* 0.0784* 0.0290 (0.0543) (0.0546) (0.0590) (0.0618) (0.0915) (0.0523) (0.0427) (0.0458) (0.0477) Main income earner in HH 0.0125 0.0871** 0.0703* 0.0964** 0.0675 -0.0138 0.00116 -0.0320 0.164*** (0.0351) (0.0353) (0.0384) (0.0410) (0.0575) (0.0355) (0.0293) (0.0309) (0.0317) rd2 -0.681*** -0.576*** -0.539*** -0.135** 0.519*** -0.148*** 0.0969** -0.431*** 0.234*** (0.0514) (0.0545) (0.0593) (0.0570) (0.0793) (0.0472) (0.0395) (0.0424) (0.0423) treat 0.0235 0.239*** 0.130*** 0.0185 -0.0310 0.0347 0.0714** -0.0398 0.0876** (0.0345) (0.0356) (0.0377) (0.0429) (0.0726) (0.0382) (0.0310) (0.0318) (0.0343) Central 0.0525 -0.415*** -0.302*** 0.339*** 0.283* -0.475*** -0.328*** -0.407*** 0.0474 (0.0670) (0.0739) (0.0773) (0.0874) (0.152) (0.0692) (0.0582) (0.0598) (0.0640) Coast 0.0230 0.106** -0.135** 0.351*** 0.521*** -0.0209 0.183*** -0.606*** 0.253*** (0.0546) (0.0538) (0.0589) (0.0741) (0.124) (0.0591) (0.0459) (0.0484) (0.0514) Nairobi -0.171** -0.380*** 0.0223 0.959*** 1.142*** -0.167* 0.110 -0.661*** 0.405*** (0.0861) (0.0913) (0.0868) (0.0908) (0.148) (0.0875) (0.0701) (0.0760) (0.0766) Nyanza -0.116** -0.0962** -0.141*** 0.303*** 0.465*** -0.191*** 0.255*** -0.647*** 0.0823* (0.0489) (0.0484) (0.0517) (0.0682) (0.117) (0.0521) (0.0409) (0.0431) (0.0462) Rift/Eastern -0.164*** -0.103** -0.0878 0.317*** 0.660*** -0.181*** 0.126*** -0.443*** 0.141*** (0.0528) (0.0522) (0.0554) (0.0716) (0.122) (0.0560) (0.0440) (0.0457) (0.0494) Constant -0.858*** -1.494*** -1.360*** -1.531*** -2.451*** 1.006*** -0.0909 0.169* -1.175*** (0.110) (0.111) (0.117) (0.133) (0.226) (0.110) (0.0889) (0.0940) (0.100) Observations 11,332 11,332 11,332 11,332 11,332 11,332 11,332 11,332 11,332 Number of resp_code 6,958 6,958 6,958 6,958 6,958 6,958 6,958 6,958 6,958 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex viii: Full Set of Econometric Results | Page 258 VARIABLES pcon_dc pcon_parl pcon_min pcon_pp pcon_anygov pview_lgov pview_voi pview_pp1 pview_pp2 Treatment effect: Treated x Round 2 -0.0665 -0.0911 -0.0410 0.0231 -0.0926* -0.0323 0.124** -0.277*** -0.135* (0.0639) (0.0648) (0.0635) (0.0662) (0.0524) (0.0522) (0.0503) (0.0508) (0.0807) Age 0.0131*** 0.00749** 0.00890*** 0.00651** 0.00788*** -0.00283 0.00130 -0.00267 - 0.0141*** (0.00319) (0.00321) (0.00321) (0.00326) (0.00269) (0.00260) (0.00243) (0.00246) (0.00406) Female -0.168*** -0.242*** -0.292*** -0.244*** -0.381*** 0.0902*** 0.0479* -0.0378 -0.0727 (0.0396) (0.0401) (0.0397) (0.0406) (0.0320) (0.0303) (0.0286) (0.0288) (0.0457) Education: completed primary 0.0659 0.0676 0.0527 0.0731 0.0832** -0.172*** 0.00852 0.0663* -0.0887 (0.0521) (0.0521) (0.0525) (0.0529) (0.0400) (0.0373) (0.0359) (0.0361) (0.0578) Education: completed secondary 0.207*** 0.213*** 0.289*** 0.209*** 0.243*** -0.140*** -0.0226 -0.0142 0.0207 (0.0356) (0.0357) (0.0355) (0.0360) (0.0292) (0.0285) (0.0266) (0.0268) (0.0428) Migrated 0.0675 0.114* 0.0362 0.0204 0.0332 -0.0864* -0.194*** -0.0131 -0.0405 (0.0602) (0.0618) (0.0593) (0.0604) (0.0470) (0.0446) (0.0428) (0.0431) (0.0666) Main income earner in HH 0.209*** 0.158*** 0.124*** 0.174*** 0.185*** -0.0168 -0.0345 -0.0343 -0.0495 (0.0388) (0.0391) (0.0382) (0.0395) (0.0315) (0.0309) (0.0292) (0.0295) (0.0466) rd2 0.369*** 0.318*** 0.415*** 0.247*** 0.268*** 0.142*** -0.438*** 0.495*** 0.0755 (0.0508) (0.0523) (0.0511) (0.0537) (0.0416) (0.0408) (0.0398) (0.0403) (0.0645) treat 0.00687 0.152*** 0.0911** 0.140*** 0.0895*** -0.154*** 0.00456 0.132*** 0.146*** (0.0437) (0.0440) (0.0440) (0.0447) (0.0336) (0.0328) (0.0307) (0.0309) (0.0499) Central 0.183** -0.137* 0.102 -0.142* 0.00873 -0.0426 -0.126** -0.183*** -0.366*** (0.0809) (0.0821) (0.0826) (0.0857) (0.0637) (0.0630) (0.0576) (0.0581) (0.108) Coast 0.446*** 0.358*** 0.500*** 0.368*** 0.261*** 0.254*** -0.0907** 0.0194 -0.419*** (0.0661) (0.0630) (0.0667) (0.0651) (0.0511) (0.0487) (0.0459) (0.0458) (0.0835) Nairobi 0.709*** 0.488*** 0.719*** 0.505*** 0.441*** -0.00932 -0.0255 0.142** 0.00670 (0.0899) (0.0885) (0.0905) (0.0898) (0.0780) (0.0766) (0.0704) (0.0703) (0.111) Nyanza 0.105* -0.00604 0.262*** 0.132** 0.115** -0.0161 -0.171*** 0.383*** 0.103 (0.0613) (0.0581) (0.0613) (0.0597) (0.0457) (0.0439) (0.0407) (0.0408) (0.0636) Rift/Eastern 0.329*** 0.0798 0.261*** 0.131** 0.139*** 0.268*** -0.128*** 0.315*** 0.102 (0.0639) (0.0616) (0.0648) (0.0636) (0.0491) (0.0471) (0.0441) (0.0441) (0.0685) Constant -2.142*** -1.905*** -2.031*** -1.913*** -0.887*** -0.231** 0.347*** -0.198** -1.114*** (0.133) (0.131) (0.133) (0.132) (0.0993) (0.0942) (0.0888) (0.0894) (0.146) Observations 11,332 11,332 11,332 11,332 11,332 11,332 11,332 11,332 11,332 Number of resp_code 6,958 6,958 6,958 6,958 6,958 6,958 6,958 6,958 6,958 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex viii: Full Set of Econometric Results | Page 259 VARIABLES pview_par1 pview_par2 pview_lc1 pview_lc2 pview_dlg1 pview_dlg2 sc_ethid sc_lead sc_grany Treatment effect: Treated x Round 2 -0.180*** -0.204*** -0.135*** -0.118 -0.231*** -0.329*** -0.0659 -0.0860 0.0354 (0.0505) (0.0781) (0.0513) (0.0807) (0.0508) (0.0826) (0.0513) (0.0548) (0.0569) Age -0.00225 -0.00850** 0.00410 - 0.0104*** 0.00225 -0.00466 0.000611 0.00735*** -0.00295 (0.00245) (0.00382) (0.00253) (0.00394) (0.00250) (0.00396) (0.00255) (0.00281) (0.00280) Female -0.0651** 0.00144 -0.0368 -0.0694 -0.0598** -0.0182 -0.00873 -0.0739** -0.0558* (0.0288) (0.0434) (0.0295) (0.0449) (0.0293) (0.0461) (0.0298) (0.0332) (0.0331) Education: completed primary 0.122*** 0.133** 0.0993*** -0.0678 0.0639* 0.000603 0.00304 0.280*** 0.154*** (0.0360) (0.0574) (0.0369) (0.0564) (0.0366) (0.0597) (0.0373) (0.0426) (0.0400) Education: completed secondary 0.0573** -0.0292 -0.00358 0.0107 0.0796*** 0.0873** -0.0402 0.252*** 0.163*** (0.0268) (0.0401) (0.0275) (0.0419) (0.0273) (0.0429) (0.0277) (0.0306) (0.0311) Migrated 0.0366 -0.0327 -0.000711 0.0194 0.0142 -0.0107 -0.0372 -0.0733 0.0640 (0.0429) (0.0633) (0.0437) (0.0675) (0.0434) (0.0676) (0.0440) (0.0477) (0.0489) Main income earner in HH -0.0405 -0.000668 -0.0682** -0.0519 -0.0176 0.0192 0.0527* -0.0272 - 0.0945*** (0.0295) (0.0444) (0.0300) (0.0458) (0.0298) (0.0469) (0.0302) (0.0330) (0.0338) rd2 0.253*** -0.0167 0.321*** 0.0330 0.329*** 0.0632 -0.0111 -0.117*** -0.114*** (0.0399) (0.0629) (0.0407) (0.0656) (0.0404) (0.0641) (0.0404) (0.0440) (0.0435) treat 0.152*** 0.238*** 0.114*** 0.212*** 0.104*** 0.179*** 0.0150 0.389*** 0.238*** (0.0310) (0.0473) (0.0314) (0.0490) (0.0314) (0.0496) (0.0319) (0.0354) (0.0357) Central -0.187*** 0.0428 -0.0184 -0.211** -0.0990* -0.196** -0.0402 -0.906*** -0.611*** (0.0575) (0.0866) (0.0589) (0.0997) (0.0587) (0.0953) (0.0605) (0.0703) (0.0719) Coast -0.222*** -0.447*** -0.0873* -0.351*** -0.145*** -0.545*** 0.171*** -0.676*** -0.978*** (0.0458) (0.0808) (0.0469) (0.0803) (0.0469) (0.0877) (0.0478) (0.0545) (0.0588) Nairobi -0.0381 -0.110 0.0893 -0.0318 0.00404 -0.205* 0.332*** -0.550*** -0.564*** (0.0700) (0.110) (0.0722) (0.112) (0.0717) (0.118) (0.0726) (0.0818) (0.0858) Nyanza 0.176*** 0.121** 0.200*** 0.0801 0.193*** 0.0267 -0.0667 -0.278*** -0.365*** (0.0409) (0.0612) (0.0419) (0.0633) (0.0417) (0.0624) (0.0428) (0.0467) (0.0560) Rift/Eastern 0.160*** 0.0701 0.252*** 0.195*** 0.196*** 0.0254 0.0931** -0.480*** -0.536*** (0.0442) (0.0662) (0.0455) (0.0669) (0.0451) (0.0671) (0.0460) (0.0510) (0.0587) Constant -0.0370 -1.413*** -0.171* -1.306*** -0.215** -1.464*** -0.345*** -0.577*** 1.158*** (0.0892) (0.142) (0.0916) (0.140) (0.0909) (0.150) (0.0927) (0.103) (0.105) Observations 11,332 11,332 11,332 11,332 11,332 11,332 11,332 11,332 11,332 Number of resp_code 6,958 6,958 6,958 6,958 6,958 6,958 6,958 6,958 6,958 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex viii: Full Set of Econometric Results | Page 260 VARIABLES y12no pc1 ser sc_grnum Treatment effect: Treated x Round 2 -1,058 0.189** 0.0619*** -0.0972* (3,679) (0.0774) (0.0181) (0.0570) Age 731.6*** -0.00104 0.00393*** 0.000888 (176.1) (0.00375) (0.000881) (0.00306) Female -13,005*** 0.145*** -0.0439*** -0.255*** (2,098) (0.0440) (0.0104) (0.0356) Education: completed primary 9,025*** -0.710*** 0.0266** 0.278*** (2,664) (0.0555) (0.0130) (0.0441) Education: completed secondary 13,320*** -0.237*** 0.0545*** 0.274*** (1,936) (0.0409) (0.00963) (0.0330) Migrated -3,543 -0.0352 -0.0456*** 0.110** (3,087) (0.0657) (0.0155) (0.0511) Main income earner in HH 14,858*** 0.298*** 0.0291*** -0.0236 (2,118) (0.0450) (0.0106) (0.0352) rd2 20,865*** -0.0915 -0.137*** -0.232*** (2,997) (0.0613) (0.0143) (0.0452) treat 5,286** -0.240*** 0.0185* 0.610*** (2,362) (0.0473) (0.0112) (0.0372) Central 37,666*** -0.217** -0.0280 -1.079*** (4,199) (0.0883) (0.0209) (0.0726) Coast -11,346*** 0.365*** -0.164*** -1.019*** (3,418) (0.0705) (0.0166) (0.0578) Nairobi 4,606 0.292*** -0.0932*** -0.774*** (5,033) (0.108) (0.0254) (0.0890) Nyanza -1,086 0.0784 -0.181*** -0.496*** (3,009) (0.0625) (0.0148) (0.0513) Rift/Eastern 8,770*** 0.345*** -0.169*** -0.663*** (3,238) (0.0677) (0.0160) (0.0554) Constant 9,064 0.530*** 3.221*** 1.864*** (6,631) (0.137) (0.0322) (0.110) Observations 9,859 11,156 11,328 11,332 Number of resp_code 6,404 6,937 6,955 6,958 Final Report Annexes: Yes Youth Can! Annex x: YYC Glossary | Page 261 ANNEX IX. BIBLIOGRAPHY REFERENCES USAID. (2013). USAID/Kenya Yes Youth Can! National Fact Sheet. Retrieved from http://www.usaid.gov/kenya/fact-sheets/yes-youth-canmwamko-wa-vijana USAID. (2011). Evaluation Policy, p. 1. Retrieved from http://www.usaid.gov/evaluation/policy Filmer, D., & Pritchett, L. (1998). Estimating Wealth Effects Without Expenditure Data - Or Tears: With and Application to Educational Enrolments in States of India. (World Bank Policy Research Working Paper #1994). Gertler, P. J., Martinez, S., Premand, P., Rawlings, L. B., & Vermeersch, C. M. J. (2011). Impact Evaluation in Practice. World Bank Publications, The World Bank, Number 2550. Narayan, D., & Pritchett, L. (1999). Cents and Sociability: Household Income and Social Capital in Rural Tanzania. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 47 (4), 871-897. Scholz, U., Gutierrez-Dona, B., Sud, S., & Schwarzer, R. (2002). Is General Self-Efficacy a Universal Construct? European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 18 (2), 242-251.