POLICY ENGAGEMENT AND ADVOCACY TRAINING WORKSHOP FOR OSIWA GRANTEES IN NIGERIA

WORKSHOP EVALUATION REPORT

(27- 30 September, 2010)

Trainers: MARGARET WARD AND PAUL NYULAKU

VENUE: STARFIRE HOTEL, GRA, Lagos, Nigeria

OCTOBER, 2010.

Introduction In September 2010, a four day workshop was organized in Lagos, Nigeria, titled Policy Engagement and Advocacy Training Workshop for OSIWA Grantees. At the end of the training, participants were handed over questionnaires to access the outcome of the workshop. In all, fourteen participants participated in the programme. Thirteen out of fourteen filled out the questionnaires, representing 92.9% of the total number of participants. The questionnaire was divided into two sections, that is, Section A (Overall Course Delivery) and Section B (Course Content). Each section contained set of questions to be answered by participants. Below is a compilation of the responses from the participants at the workshop. Section A I: Overall Course Delivery Percentage Rating Outcomes of Participants Areas of Assessment What is your overall impression of the workshop? Were your objectives for this workshop met? Rate your satisfaction with the course training materials Taking into account your knowledge of policy advocacy before the workshop, did the workshop help to build your knowledge and skills in this area? How effective was The Discussions the methodology The Exercises used in the workshop? Very Satisfied 36% 50% 50% 50% Satisfied 50% 36% 36% 36% Not Satisfied -

57% 50%

29% 29%

II: Participants Response to Rating Overall impression of the workshop The training was strategic and insightful. Interactively excellent. Expectation in policy engagement and advocacy was achieved. The workshop was timely in the implementation of our budget advocacy work. The workshop outcome was good; it was very educative and worthwhile. The workshop concerned the areas that will improve participants capacity in policy paper development and understanding of the processes. Practical and interesting.

A well put together training. The methodology was not stressful. Facilitators took into account the needs of the participants. The organization of the workshop was perfect and impressive. The content of the training was properly delivered. The workshop was well organized to deal with various issues.

1. Were your training objectives met? Participants indicated in their response that, their objectives were met. Below are the responses: Learned to write policy papers and organize advocacy. The workshop helped to know the wrong things being done and learned how to correct it. The workshop presented the opportunity to learn and share experience. Better knowledge about policy engagement and advocacy now. Helped in writing a good policy brief, policy study and using the advocacy framework. The workshop covered the areas that will improve capacity in policy paper development and understanding the processes. Improved knowledge on policy engagement, writing and advocacy. The objectives were met in terms of both fear and expectation. To improve in advocacy writing. 2. Course Training Materials The training materials are very comprehensive and explanatory. They covered the required areas adequately. The course materials are not too user friendly. Some prints are very tiny. There are typos, the sequencing did not follow the activities. The course materials are adequate- they explain issues and have good activities. The training material was quite user friendly, the task where engaging, explanatory. Good and useful for subsequent step down training. Educative and enlightening course materials. The course material was particularly useful. Very good resource material. Well, it looked complex, but working along with it made it practical and understandable. The training materials were adequate. Adequate, good resource material can be used every time. Course materials were quite comprehensive but hard to follow. 3. Knowledge and Skills Acquisition In response to whether they have built on their knowledge, the participants acknowledged that, and added that, the training has: Helped to facilitate better and become involved in policy advocacy. Given more insight on how a policy advocacy paper should be structured, and the content.

Provided a totally different idea about a policy advocacy. Will be utilized in organizational work in pushing forward policy papers. Enhanced understanding in policy papers. Clarified the common confusion between a policy study and policy brief. Provided the skills in policy processes and development of policy papers. Really helped in improving knowledge- writing a good quality policy paper and enhanced advocacy skills. Helped to re-order knowledge- to be more process driven instead of the scatter-gum approach previously. Assisted in distinguishing between public policy paper studies and ordinary academic paper. It really enhanced skills in structuring public policy. Improved the previous knowledge on the issues.

4. Training Methodology I: Discussions Very satisfied with. Allows for interactions and discussion. Gave an opportunity of idea sharing. The methodologies were good and adequate for matured people and discussions very relevant to the issues. Opened fresh perspectives to viewing problems, adding to ones experience. The discussions were great it made me see others opinion and change come of mine. Allow room for participation, contributions, experience sharing etc. Participatory. The group discussions and plenary ones were quite effective. Very effective. Not overloading the participants with information at same time. Excellent impressive. I liked it, individually, and as a group we learnt a lot from each other. It was interactive in nature. Satisfactory. Resource persons, participants and group work were interesting. The facility (hotel) should be improved. Effective. The methodology of the workshop was satisfactory. It allowed participants to discuss and share from their own experience. This was very helpful. II: The Exercises The exercises were quite engaging and insightful. Everybody was carried along in the discussion and contribution. Demanding, educative and entertaining. Very participatory. Tasking and interesting.

Brainstorming, idea sharing and provided a deeper understanding of the issues. The exercise helped. It made the class lively and not boring. Ensured full participation. Quite educative. Stimulating. Brain tasking and more proactive. Idea sharing.

Section B I: Training Content 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 Percentage Rating Outcomes of Participants Policy Advocacy Very useful, am very Satisfied with Not satisfied, satisfied this topic, may be useful 14% 21% 29% may not be useful -

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

79% 71% 64%

Write one or two sentences to describe what you learned from the workshop. Learned the differences between policy brief and study, how one can lead or feed unto the other and what a policy can or cannot be. Effective way of writing policy briefs and policy study, designing, conceptualizing and advocacy planning framework. How advocacy policy paper should be planned and why, who to target, and means of communication (language). The aim of policy advocacy paper is to inform, persuade and call to action. Broader perspective of what policy advocacy is about and how to implement the APF into practical work. Writing and developing a coherent policy paper. Better ways of ensuring successful advocacy and widened my expertise in policy advocacy.

Deepened knowledge about the policy processes- when to engage; how to develop a policy paper; its content; types of policy papers and when to use which of the types. Advocacy needs negotiation and changing ideas. Policy papers can be influential or used to achieve results and goes beyond bills. There is procedure/process for all aspects of developing work which when well observed could maximize outcome. Enhanced capacity to write a policy paper. The advocacy policy framework has refocused thought on advocacy. Offered the opportunity to set the stage for future engagement in policy issues. To be committed in advocacy.

Recommendation on How the Workshop Can Be Improved WACSI should allow more time for such workshop and target participants that might be better able to handle the time and number of days. The program should be extended to other organizations. The venue was very disappointing. The hall was too small. There is the need to use a better and more conducive venue. All participants should be accommodated and the venue should be out of the town probably in the outskirt where movement might be restricted. Subsequent training if targeting heads of CSOs should be organized on the outskirts of the city. It should also be adapted for possible training of programme officers, middle cadre officers in CSOs. Ensure enough time/days for training. Get a more suitable hall for training. The activities and exercises are good but there should be lectures, presentations, and introduction at the beginning of the training. The manual should be sequence for participants to read ahead. There should be a well structured time for each of the sessions. Continue with the present style- participation by participants. Extend the date for more understanding and be of assistance to organizations who want to step down the trainings in different levels (grassroots). Should aim to get African experiences. Assessment of Facilitators Margaret has practical experience, which she used to buttress her presentations. Paul merges an academic and practicing experience which is rare. They are both good, communication was effective and carried everybody along. The facilitators were generally good. They allowed for more active participation. They shared their own experiences and suggestions with the participants. Existence of a firm understanding between the two instructors which is an advantage.

Cordial and forthcoming with simple but clear explanation. They kept to time. Excellent in their tasks and complemented. Good and the class were participatory. Facilitators did well in the facilitation- allowed participation, responded well to issues/ questions raised and ensured participants understanding of the training content. Well facilitated and organized, our concerns well taken care of. Excellent delivery skills. Very good. They used very participatory approach and allowed participants the space to air their views. Good time management. The facilitators were quite interesting, easy to understand their presentations. Engagements with participants were excellent. The facilitators were very generous with their knowledge, experience and time.

Course Duration Percentage Rating Outcome of Participants Too Long Too Short 29%

About Right 50%

Appendix I 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 Rating Not Satisfied = 1 Please Explain Your Response Here

Areas of Assessment 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

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 Very useful am Satisfied with very satisfied this topic, may be useful Not at all satisfied, may not be useful

Policy Advocacy workshop 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)

1. 2.

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? _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________ 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

No

NAME OF ORGANISATION 1. WACSI 2. TRAINER/CENTECS, UNIPORT 3. TRAINER/GENDER CENTRE 4. THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC RIGHTS AND ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT 5. THE LEGAL DEFENCE AND ASSISTANCE PROJECT 6. CENTRE FOR CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNANCE 7. WADCR 8. PARTNERSHIP FOR JUSTICE 9. PROJECT ALERT ON VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN 10. RESOURCE CENTRE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS & CIVIC EDUCATION (CHRICED)

Appendix II LIST OF PARTICIPANTS THE WACSI/OSIWA/LGI POLICY ADVOCACY TRAINING IN LAGOS, NIGERIA 27 30, LAGOS, NIGERIA. Attendee Position EMAIL ADDRESS OMOLARA BALOGUN Advocacy obalogun@wacsi.org officer PAUL BEMSHIMA Trainer bemreen@yahoo.com NYULAKU MARGARET BREWTrainer abawardgh@yahoo.com WARD UGOCHI OKPE Staff Attorney info@serap-nigeria.org mercygo@yahoo.co.uk EGBOKA ADAOBI NKIRUKA DR. BALOGUN PETER ADEWALE GRACE KEFETE ITORO EZE-ANABA JOSEPHINE CHUKWUMA ZIK IBRAHIM Ex. Director Legal officer Ex. Director info@ledapnigeria.org ; adaobi@ledapnigeria.org a.pbalogun@yahoo.ca

Phone +233 243 746790 08036301347 +233 208171563 08033424664

Sex F M F F

+234 1 7611852/ 070 31867663/ 2802009 08034040009

F M

Programmes Director

womenadvocate@yahoo.com timayen@yahoo.com projectalert@projectalertnig.org josephine@projectalertnig.org jeffahchukwuma@yahoo.com; zikibrahim@hotmail.com

234-1-8197344, 08027592145 08062828484 08069839295, 0803304771, 08033016027 08023 133924

F F F

Ex. Director

11. LEGAL RESOURCES CONSORTIUM 12. KIND 13. TAMTASS DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES 14. THE ANCHOR 15. ELECTORAL REFORM NETWORK (ERN) 16. COMMUNITY ACTION FOR POPULAR PARTICIPATION (CAPP) 17. CLEEN FOUNDATION ABSENT 1.

NATHANIEL N. NGWU AMY OYEKUNLE DR. JAMES H. LANDI OTUNBA GBAKINRO ADEWALE OLUCHI ANOZIE C. KYAUTA GIWA

Legal officer Ex. Director Ex. Director Ex. Director Asst. Prog. Officer Ex. Director

lrclagos@yahoo.com nathngwu@gmail.com amyoyeks@yahoo.com kindnigeria@yahoo.com Jamland55@yahoo.com tammtass@yahoo.com agbakinro@yahoo.co.uk theanchor@ymail.com Electoralreform2001@yahoo.com/oluc hi@electoralreformnetwork.org kyauiliya2k4@yahoo.com

08038739781 08034540311 +2348035982095 +2348037220122 08067740021 +2348032857684

M F M M F F

KEMI OKENYODO

Dep. Ex. Director Ex. Director

asiwaju@cleen.org www.cleen.org

+234 9 7817025/ +2348052004590 M

WISDOM UCHE DURUEKE