POLICY ENGAGEMENT AND ADVOCACY TRAINING WORKSHOP FOR CIVIL SOCIETY ACTORS IN GHANA

WORKSHOP EVALUATION REPORT
(22 – 25 NOVEMBER, 2010)

Trainers: MARY AKUA TOBBIN & JASPER CUMMEH

VENUE: WACSI SECRETARIAT, ACCRA, GHANA

DECEMBER, 2010.

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction…………………………………………………………… Overall Course Delivery………………………………………………. Course Content and Recommendation……………………………….. Assessment of Facilitators……………………………………………. Course Duration……………………………………………………… 2 2 6 7 8

2

No. of Participants: 16 No. of Respondents: 14 Introduction The West Africa Civil Society Institute (WACSI) in collaboration with the Local Government and Public Services Reform Initiative, of the Open Society Institute (LGI-OSI) and the Open Society Institute of West Africa (OSIWA) organized a four (4) day training workshop in Accra, Ghana. The theme for the workshop was Policy Engagement and Advocacy Training for Civil society Actors in Ghana. Present at the workshop were policy Advocacy officers and directors from selected civil society organizations in Ghana. The total number of participants’ present was 16, 8 males and 8 females. This gives an even representation of both sexes. At the end of the four day Training workshop, participants assessed the delivery of the workshop by answering the questions in a questionnaire giving to them. Out of the 16 participants present, 14 filled the questionnaires representing 88 per cent of the total number of participants’ at the workshop. The questionnaire was in three sessions- Overall Course Delivery, Course Content and Recommendation and Course Duration respectively. Below is a compiled response of the participants’ Session A I: Overall Course Delivery In this session participants’ were asked to rate their satisfaction in relation to the overall delivery of the workshop and give reasons to support their ratings. The ratings ranged from 3, 2 and 1 indicating, Very Satisfied, Satisfied and Not Satisfied respectively. Below is a tabular presentation of the ratings in percentages by the participants’. Table 1.0: Percentage Ratings of Overall Course Delivery Percentage Rating Outcomes of Participants Areas of Assessment Very Satisfied Satisfied Not satisfied 1. Overall Impression 2. Where your objectives met? 3. Rate your satisfaction with training materials 4. Did the workshop help build 69% 50% 75% 19% 38% -

69%

13%

3

on knowledge & skills? 5. How effective was the methodology? Discussions Exercises 63% 63% 19% 19% -

II: Participants Response to Ratings Overall Impression  The outcome of the workshop was good.  It was well organized; good facilitation and timing of the agenda.  It was very interesting, interactive and insightful.  The training was good and informative.  The workshop provided critical insight in policy advocacy.  The training was well organized.  It was a very good and a productive workshop.  Excellent delivery of the workshop.  The approaches for the trainings were unique, participatory and very informative.  The workshop brought on board new participatory methods of reinforcing previous knowledge.  Provided the initiation and delivery processes that could help and enhance advocacy skills.  Participant’s expectations for the workshop were met.  The workshop was intensive.  The use of relevant case studies made the workshop interactive and informative. Training Objectives  The objectives were met because it enhanced participants’ skills and interest in advocacy.  Participants’ gained insight into policy engagement and advocacy in Ghana, hence objective met.  Participants’ objectives in the development of a policy paper were met.  Learnt the basic skills to assist in the development and advocacy of policies.  Learned that policy advocacy is a process by itself.  The training was overwhelming.  Although the final day training was rushed it was very significant.  The training has enhanced participant’s knowledge in policy advocacy.  The workshop provided the appropriate insights into the various topics.
4

 Participant needs more information on developing strategic advocacy plans. Training Materials  Participants’ indicated that the materials are very useful reference document.  The Materials are comprehensive.  They are very good and practical. (2 participants)  They are very useful handy for any work. (2 participants)  The materials were very detailed.  They are in-depth.  Serve as a good guide and a point of reference for participants’.  The materials fulfill the objectives of participants’.  They are comprehensible and exhausting.  They materials are loaded.  They are satisfactory. Knowledge and Skills Acquisition Participants’ acknowledged the usefulness of the workshop in relations to their knowledge and skills level. The following were their responses:  Learnt new things that is, new perspective to bring results.  Participants’ realized what policy advocacy work entails.  The participants have gained more insight and understanding of policy advocacy  Participants’ acknowledged the usefulness of the workshop.  The workshop introduced and added new dimensions and insights.  Absolutely, the training put all experiences acquired on the job into perspective.  The training gave much insight into an advocacy work.  Gained an understanding into the meaning of advocacy and what goes into it.  Participants’ have a sharpened orientation and focus.  The training has outlined the major avenues in writing policy documents in a simple way.  Understand the need for policy options and gained a deeper understanding of the context. Training Methodology Discussions  The discussions were good, open, friendly, participatory and focused.  They were very interactive. (2 participants)  It was very good and participatory.  It was participatory, ensured everyone had the opportunity to contribute.  The discussions were very effective.  They were self-explanatory and easy to remember.  Participants’ acknowledged that it was participatory, involving and lively. (2 participants)
5

   

It was great and more effective in smaller groups. The discussion was interesting and informative. Insightful participatory discussions. It was very clear.

Exercises  The exercises were involving.  It was intensive and exhausting but good.  It was very practical; experienced the realities of networking.  They were more participatory as the groups were smaller.  The exercises were informative.  It was perfectly constructed for the workshop.  Good and brainstorming.  Straight to the point and builds the understanding.  It was good and helpful.  The exercises highlighted the real work situation and questioned stereotype.

Session B Course Content and Recommendation
How effective was the components (listed in the box below) in building your advocacy knowledge and skills. Use the following code and write the number which represents your opinion in the box Table 1.1: Percentage Ratings of Course Content

Policy Advocacy

Session 1: Understanding the context of policy advocacy and writing Session 2: Structuring and developing a coherent policy paper Session 3: Developing a targeted advocacy plan using the Advocacy Planning Framework (APF)

Percentage Rating Outcomes of Participants Very useful, Satisfied with this Not satisfied, may am very topic, may be not be useful satisfied useful 88% -

75%

13%

-

69%

19%

-

6

Write one or two sentences to describe what you learned from the workshop.                Learned how to develop policy briefs and studies. Learned about the distinction between policy study and academic research. Learned about the policy cycle and the stage civil society actors could influence. Learned how to structure policy brief as well as the difference between policy brief and policy study. Acquired knowledge on the advocacy planning framework. The workshop broadened the participant’s horizon. The Advocacy Planning Framework was a first time experience for some participants’ and was very important to them. Participants’ learned to write a policy brief. Ability to critique an existing public policy, and construct a new public policy paper. Gained insight into how a policy paper is written. Learned how to effectively plan an advocacy strategy. What a policy advocacy paper entails, how to draw up a policy paper as a communication tool, and when to intervene as an advocate. Acquired much knowledge beneficial to my work. The need to know your environment, and sending clear and simple messages. The right process to adopt when engaging in public advocacy work.

Advice for West African trainers in delivering this workshop  They should get more examples from the region.  Participants’ advised that questionnaires should be delivered to them after six month as follow-up.  Keep organizing more advanced policy engagement and advocacy training program, and training sessions for fund raising  The participants’ advised that the handouts or documents/examples should reflect West Africa situations.  They emphasized that the trainers should further strengthen CSOs through such capacity building workshops to engage policy makers towards the good of society.  To keep it up because they are a good combination. (2 participants’)  It will be more encouraging if transport could be made available to facilitate the movement of participants.  WACSI should continue to maintain and improve on their standards.  The programme was loaded perhaps a residential programme would reduce stress.  The facilitators should manage time well especially when they intend making intervention.  The trainers have been good in their delivery, keep it up!
7

Participants’ requested for assistance in getting affordable accommodation for participants outside the region or location.

Assessment of Facilitators  The facilitators coordinated so well and each did their best for stimulation of the training.  They combined the needed approach in getting participants understand the course.  They were very good and open.  Facilitators were practical and knowledgeable, satisfied with their output.  They did justice to the work and need to be commended.  Both facilitators know their job, respect each other and appreciate each other.  Very satisfied with the delivery of facilitators.  They were good and had a clear understanding of the topics even though they were more technical.  They are really experienced in the art of advocacy, for instance the facilitator is able to bring an idea to life and makes everything real.  Excellent facilitating skills, keeps the training session lively.  They are both professionals, explanatory, with energizing strategies to support teaching.  They were excellent in delivery and warm in engagement.  The facilitators were effective in the transfer of knowledge.

Session C: Course Duration Table 1.3: Percentage Rating of Course Duration Percentage Rating Outcome of Participants Too Short About Right Course duration 13% 75%

Too Long 0

ANALYSIS OF PARTICIPANTS RESPONSES It can be inferred from the table 1.0 that, whereas majority (69%) of the participants’ was very satisfied with the overall outcome of the workshop, 19% were satisfied and neither of the participants’ seemed unsatisfied with the outcome. This implies that participants were impressed with the workshop. Although participants were very satisfied with the training materials (75%), only 50% per cent were very satisfied in meeting their objectives, and 38% satisfied. Nonetheless, participants’
8

attested to the fact that the workshop was insightful and thus, helped to build on their knowledge and skills in advocacy. Furthermore, the ratings for the methodology give a clear indication of participants’ acknowledgement of the style adopted in delivering the training. Table 1.1 is a tabular representation of participants’ impression on the content of the workshop. Inferring from the table, it is clear that none of the participants had a problem with the meaning and context of policy advocacy. This implies that participants’ gained an in-depth understanding of the context of advocacy. However, this does not lose sight of the fact, minority (13%) of the participants’ are not very satisfied in relation to structuring and developing a good policy paper. The objective of the workshop was to introduce participants’ to tools required in developing a coherent policy paper and enhance their skills, but not necessarily to make them perfectionist. This is because it would take consistent writings to develop an excellent paper. Again, 69% of the participants’ indicated that they were very satisfied with the delivery of the Advocacy Planning Framework (APF) and 19% were satisfied. Drawing from the responses of the participants’ to the ratings, this is impressive because the APF was new to most of the participants’ and the ratings showed that they appreciated and understood the policy tool. Finally, in relation to the duration of the course, 75% representing majority views of the participants attested to the fact that the time frame was just about right whereas 13% indicated that the duration was short. In sum, participants were impressed about the outcome of the workshop as it enhanced their skills and broadened their scope of understanding. Participants acknowledged the use of two facilitators for the workshop and were appreciative of the methodology adopted by the facilitators. Participants’ recommended residential programme and transportation to reduce stress. Furthermore, participants suggested for more regional examples to be incorporated into the workshop materials. They commended WACSI for the good work and encouraged the institute to organize more of such workshops in the country and the sub-region as a whole.

9

APPEDIX 1 EVALUATION FORM We would really appreciate your feedback on the workshop to help improve the quality of future policy trainings. Please provide your feedback on the questions below by writing your opinion, underlining or circling appropriate answers or placing a number in the space provided. A. Overall Course Delivery

Using 3, 2 or 1 (as defined below), indicate your level of satisfaction Very Satisfied = 3 Satisfied = 2 Not Satisfied = 1 Areas of Assessment Ratin g Please Explain Your Response Here

1. What is your overall impression of the workshop?

2. Were your objectives for this workshop met?

3. Rate your satisfaction with the Course training materials 4. Taking into account your knowledge of policy advocacy before the workshop, did the workshop help to build your knowledge and skills in this area? 5. How effective was the methodology used in the workshop?

The Discussions

The Exercises
10

B. Course Content How effective were the workshop components (listed in the box below) in building your policy advocacy knowledge and skills. Use the following code and write the number which represents your opinion in the box: Rating Satisfied with this topic, may be useful

Policy Advocacy workshop

Very useful am very satisfied

Not at all satisfied, may not be useful

1. 2.

Session 1 – Understanding the context of policy advocacy and writing Session 2 – Structuring and developing a coherent policy paper Session 3 – Developing a targeted advocacy plan using the Advocacy Planning Framework (APF)

3.

1. Write one or two sentences to describe what you learned from the workshop. ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ 3. What advice would you give to the West African trainers in delivering this workshop? ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________

11

4. Briefly indicate your assessment of the facilitators in his delivery and engagement with participants (use reverse of the sheet if you wish/need more space) ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________

C.

Please assess the duration of the course (please tick) Too long Too short About Right

12

APPENDIX II List of Participants’ Name of Applicant 1. Oluwatoyin Oyelabi 2. Lillian Mwintome Kuutiero 3. Joyce Lena Danquah Organization Evergreen Women Initiative OXFAM GB Gender Center Position Executive Director Advocacy and Communication Assistant Project OfficerCommunication, Advocacy &Networking Lecturer E-mail Address toyinoje@gmail.com Ikuutiero@gmail.com joycedanquah@gmail.com Phone 054 730 7042/ 020 732 9579 020 836 6156 0244 222 629

4. Esther Ekua Amoako 5. Dorcas Adjeley Yobo

6. Seth Frimpong 7. Rev. Fr. Patrick M. Amos 8. Joseph Bangu 9. Franklin AsareDonkoh 10. Azumi Mensuna 11. Chibeze Sunday Ezekiel Victoria

University for Development Studies Foundation for Security Policy/Advocacy Officer and Development Africa Hunger Project- Ghana Project Officer Dialogue & Advocacy for Good Governance Dialogue & Advocacy for Good Governance National Trust/Green Communications Network Northern Ghana Network for Dev’t Strategic Youth Network for Development Peasant Farmers Assoc. Director

ekubee@yahoo.com yobo@fosda.net

0244 206 175 0302 252 1914

sethfrimpong@yahoo.com emospat@yahoo.co.uk bangujoseph2002@yahoo.com
balinco2007@yahoo.com

Coordinator- Peace Building Programmes News Editor/ Communication Director Training Coordinator Executive Coordinator

0242 384 1927/ 020 824 1927 0307 0134 00/ 0244 777 377 020 163 5289/ 0246 154 687 0242 353 243

Mensuna006@yahoo.com info@strategicyouthnetwork.org

0243 353 108 0244 967 931

12.

Programme Coordinator

peasantfarmersghana@yahoo.com 0244 657 451/ 13

Adongo 13. Eric Lartey 14. Bernard Asamoah Henebeng 15. Ewura-Abena Ahwoi

Ghana Friends of the EarthGhana Ghana Anti-Corruption Coalition (GACC) FAWE CSU-USAIDTLMP/GHANA Non WACSI WACSI AGENDA

Porgramme Coordinator Research Officer FAWE -Vice Chairman In-Country Coordinator, CSU-USAIDTLMP/Ghana Non Intern Intern Facilitator Facilitator

larteyeric@yahoo.co.uk bhenebeng@yahoo.com / bhenebeng@ghanaanticorruption.org eahwoi@yahoo.co.uk

0302 254 518 0244 707 201 0245 418 506 0244-233 126/0302771089/0302770610 0204087850 0243 917 687 0242 661 480 231-6-542 933

16.

Naafah Kokoi Gervin 17. Aicha Araba Etrew 18. Assiatou Diallo 19. Jasper Cummeh 20. Mary Tobbin 21. Omolara Balogun

naafahkokoi@gmail.com aetrew@wacsi.org adiallo@wacsi.org Jasper-cummeh@freeagenda.org matobbin@yahoo.co.uk obalogun@wacsi.org

WACSI

Policy Advocacy Officer

0243 746 790

14

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful

Master Your Semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.