1 TRAINING NARRATIVE REPORT DATE: 12 th – 15 th DECEMBER, 2011. VENUE: HOTEL BARMOI, ABERDEEN, SIERRA LEONE. Facilitators Paul Bemshima Nyulaku & Omolara Balogun SPECIALISED POLICY ADVOCACY AND ENGAGEMENT TRAINING FOR CIVIL SOCIETY ACTORS IN SIERRA LEONE
27
Embed
Policy Advocacy and Engagement Training Narrative Report - Freetown, Sierra Leone (December 12 - 15, 2011)
SPECIALISED POLICY ADVOCACY AND ENGAGEMENT TRAINING FOR CIVIL SOCIETY ACTORS IN SIERRA LEONE
TRAINING NARRATIVE REPORT DATE: 12th – 15th DECEMBER, 2011.
VENUE: HOTEL BARMOI, ABERDEEN, SIERRA LEONE. Facilitators Paul Bemshima Nyulaku & Omolara Balogun
1
Table of Contents Introduction……………………………………………………………………………...............3 Objectives of the workshop………………………………………………………………….....3 The Workshop methodology………………………….……………………………………..…3 Training content………………………………………………………..……………………..…4 Tr
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
LGI Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative
NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations
OSI Open Society Institute
OSIWA Open Society Initiative for West Africa
WACSI West Africa Civil Society Institute
4
INTRODUCTION The West Africa Civil Society Institute (WACSI) with the Open Society Initiative for West Africa (OSIWA) organized a four (4) day Specialised Policy Advocacy Engagement training - for Civil Society actors in Sierra Leone. The workshop was specifically designed to respond to the policy influencing and advocacy gaps identified amidst Civil Society Organisations and to help them hold government accountable. Since the commencement of WACSI in 2007, the institute has been committed to championing the course of strengthening the governance and development of Civil Society Actors across West Africa through regular individual capacity development and institutional strengthening training programmes. The four-day workshop which was held from the 12th – 15th of December, 2011 in Sierra Leone attracted 20 representatives from different CSO’s and networks within the country. OBJECTIVES OF THE WORKSHOP The objectives of the Policy Engagement and Advocacy Training were to:
To enhance Civil Society Organisations knowledge of public policy networks and processes;
To enhance Civil Society Organisations ability to write and use evidence-based and targeted policy papers;
To build insight into the process of planning an effective policy advocacy campaign;
To increase Civil Society Organisations understanding of the policy environment in West Africa and potential entry points; and
To provide a platform for Civil Society Actors across the sub-region to form advocacy networks and build alliances.
WORKSHOP METHODOLOGY The workshop was practical in nature and targets the policy writing and advocacy needs of workshop participants. It was done using experience sharing, learning by doing, group exercises, case studies, testimonies, role play, etc. The workshop methodology was founded on interaction and insightful commitment, based on participants’ specific individual and organisational needs. The workshop methodology also used a Manual, which served as a guiding tool to the entire training for each participant, under the direction of the Trainers. The participants had very good insights and were very committed; the interaction was constructive and excellent. TRAINING CONTENTS The workshop was structured around three thematic areas: understanding the context of policy advocacy and writing; structuring and developing a coherent public policy paper; and developing a targeted Advocacy Planning Framework.
1) Understanding the context of policy advocacy and writing: i.e. understanding the nature of public policy processes and strategies to engage all stakeholders concerned in public policy making in Sierra Leone;
5
2) Structure and develop a coherent public policy paper: i.e. gaining in-depth insight into the key structural elements which are central to achieving the purpose of policy paper such as problem description, policy options, conclusion and recommendations. Also exploring different approaches to the lay-out of policy papers to be effective and concise to attract potential audiences and facilitate delivery of message.
3) Develop targeted advocacy plan using the advocacy planning framework (APF): this session sought to put participants through how to design and use the APF for all advocacy engagement. This session was duly covered in the training and brought a lot of personal and professional re-evaluation from participants.
They depart the basic comprehension of the context of Policy Advocacy to the pragmatic way of conceptualizing a targeted Advocacy Plan on the basis of the Advocacy Planning Framework (APF). Thus, these sessions were spread over all the 4 days of the workshop. After this, the participants concluded with the followings:
- Advocacy comes from analysis. - Advocacy is evidence based
TRAINING -GOAL The overall goal of the workshop was designed to raise awareness of the various aspects of the challenges of effective policy advocacy for civil society actors in Sierra Leone. Thus, the Training aimed at sharpening participants’ vision, language and tools to advance the respective goals of their organisations and improve their individual policy advocacy skills. This will be possible by equipping participants with strategic insights, skills and resources to design policy-relevant advocacy campaigns and communication tools that deliver a compelling policy position to achieve desired results. OPENING CEREMONY The workshop started with the delivery of the WACSI’s Policy Advocacy Officer opening speech. Ms Omolara Balogun stated that it was a great pleasure to welcome the participants at this Training; even though they had a busy schedule they made time to participate. It was obvious judging from their CVs that they have competencies and are experienced. Although they are already used to engaging in advocacy programmes there is a need for innovative strategies to enhance their work and approach, she stressed. She introduced the training module as one that was developed by OSIWA (Open Society Initiative for West Africa), LGI (Local Governance and Public Sector Reform Initiative) and WACSI (West Africa Civil Society Institute) to enhance innovativeness in the policy advocacy work and approaches. This programme, she added, began in 2008, implemented across West Africa. It had been adapted from East Europe region where work on democracy and good governance is currently more advanced, and where the modules had been sufficiently tests to contribute to the strengthening of policy advocacy to advance democracy So far the module has been used in Benin, Cote
6
d’Ivoire, Liberia, Nigeria, Togo and Senegal. This is the first time the Module is being used to train civil society actors in Sierra Leone. She gave a brief introduction of WACSI, established in 2005 and became operational in 2007. Its creation was driven by the need to contribute to bridge the gaps/ needs existing within Civil Society sector across West Africa sub-region. For this purpose the Institute acts through three (3) dimensions. The Training and Capacity Building Unit (1.0) works to strengthening technical and institutional capacities of civil society actors in many areas such as NGO management, Corporate Governance and Fundraising and Resource Mobilization. The Research and Documentation Unit (2.0) is in charge of conducting the Institute research on issues facing civil society; in this sense, publications are produced, monographs are published and press-release disseminated on several topics. With respect to the Policy Advocacy Unit (3.0), there are two main aspects; a theoretical and a technical aspect. Ms Omolara stated that WACSI cannot engage directly in advocacy action but WACSI is primarily responsible for working with civil society actors to facilitate how they can strategically and better engage in advocacy. The Institute also provides critical space/facilitating role for civil society organisations to advocate and cited the examples of some of such initiatives in the past, including the Political Dialogues between CSO’s, Parliaments and the Private Sector. Ms. Omolara Balogun, WACSI’s Policy Advocacy Officer ended her speech by encouraging participants to actively participate in the training by following instructions given by her and the co-facilitator (Paul) who came out of a tough Training of Trainers programme as the qualified Trainers for this course in the sub-region. She thanked the participants once more; then expressed her gratitude to her co-facilitator, showing special acknowledgement to him on behalf of WACSI for his endurance and qualification to deliver such a strong course even after the tiresome journey. She affirmed WACSI staff availability throughout the Training; for any questions, problems or any concern participants can refer either to her properly or to Olalekan, the intern present with her to facilitate organisational and logistical aspect of the training. Mr Paul Bemshina Nyulaku was introduced to the participants. Paul is a lecturer at the University Of Port Harcourt, Nigeria and one of the people trained specially to give this module to CSO. He confirmed how stiff the selection process which qualified them for this programme was. Since then they all have been committed to Policy Advocacy Trainings with WACSI to train civil society actors. TRAINING WORKSHOP DEVELOPMENT Dynamic Introduction The workshop began with a short exercise. The Facilitators told the participants to all stand up and walk round the conference room while interacting with other participants to know at least two things about each person in the room and that whoever come up with the highest number of people would be the winner. This was a good exercise as it brought about a dynamic openness between the participants and facilitators. It was an opportunity to start networking and creating space for future alliances.
7
Following the conclusion of the introductions, they were divided into four (4) groups according to the prior sitting arrangement for an exercise. Internal Organization In order to arouse participants’ ownership and sense of responsibility in running the programme, the Facilitators asked them to establish an order for the Training Workshop internal regulation. Thus, the participants agreed on the following code of conduct during the training workshop:
- Mobile phone should be on silent mode;
- Participants should indicate when they want to talk;
- Respect each other’s opinion; - Punctuality; - Time management;
- Be alert. No meditations - Limited movement during the
training - Active participation from everyone - Focus on discussion
Note: Offenders to any of these rules will pay a fine of 5000leones;
Leadership appointment: The leadership went to Irene Kargbo. Participants’ Expectations and Concerns Participants were asked to give their expectations and in line with the Training objectives. This was to help the Facilitators better know the expectations of everybody and consider them in delivering the course. Each participant was given a post-it and each wrote their expectations and it was posted on the wall to always be a reminder to them.
SUMMARY OF EXPECTATIONS
To understand policy framework, including theoretical and do analysis on policy
To be able to carry out policy advocacy where civil society is fragmented
To be able to do good analysis and ability to repeat it advocacy again
To be able to engage state actors on issues that has to do with advocacy
To be able to conduct research and develop reports and papers that support
policy formulation, review and implementation
To be able to learn the methodology involved in advocating for traditional issues
To build more insight into the nature of persuasive advocacy messages
To improve and enhance personal capacity in policy advocacy
To learn and understand relevant advocacy tool rather than the usual academic
writing
8
Afterwards, the Facilitators unfolded the programme objectives, methodology and
contents to the participants and were also told to go through it by reading and share
their opinions.
GROUP DISCUSSIONS
During this activity, participants were told to share their advocacy experiences. They
shared their excitement and past experiences in advocacy work. They talked about their
commitment, the challenges faced and what they do to overcome those set of
challenges. A few examples were taking in the experience sharing:
Ms Theresa Cooper shared one of the experiences her organisation (Shepherd
Hospice) which deals in health issues and terminally ill patients such as cancer, hiv/aids
had a case of a child who was entitled to child health care benefit but was denied
because the parent could not pay the green note (10,000leones). They advocated for
the child and other people in the same predicament through media and public
demonstration.
Following exposure of such challenges participants differently commented. They
encouragement one another to cultivate perseverance; though they have to take heed
of government priorities as well. All results are good from one’s perspective, either be
positive or negative the best is to draw lesson from it. They also shared the need for
monitoring and evaluation; otherwise, even a fight for charge-free service won can turn
into more costly due to subsidiary charges.
The Facilitators expressed their appreciation to all these comments. They emphasized
on the need for endurance and monitoring throughout the process for advocacy. One
should not give up even after gaining a result. Advocacy never ends; it needs focus and
monitoring on a long term, insisted the Facilitators.
TRAINING SESSIONS: Understanding the content of Policy Advocacy and writing
ACTIVITY 1: What is an effective Policy Paper?
During this activity participants had to state the characteristics of an effective Policy
paper. Participants were shared into four groups. The characteristics listed by the four
(4) groups had some similarities and differences. Three adjectives were commonly used
to express the characteristics of an effective Policy Paper:
Certain words were differently considered as part of the characteristics. Below are the
group presentations:
9
Afterwards, each group had finished their assignments, there was presentations of each
group work to justify the characteristics raised exposing them to comments and
criticisms from others. The facilitators congratulated the participants for their insights
and contributions. Furthermore, they were assured that their comments and criticisms
would be confirmed or rejected from what would happen subsequently and were also
encouraged that they should be persistent and learn to persevere and bear in mind that
in disseminating information, there is need for it to be accurate, precise, and straight to
the point and to catch policy maker attention.
GROUP 1
Title/ Heading
Problem statements/ Policy issues
Aims/Objectives
Discussion points/Key messages
Recommendations/Conclusions
GROUP 2
Situational Analysis
Goal and Objectives
Implementation Strategy
Target/Actors
Clear Message
GROUP 3
Identification of the policy issue
Set of activities
Focused
Evidence Based
Signatories/MOU
GROUP 4
Timeframe/Bound
Evidence Based
Policy Focused
Brief and to the point
Options/Recommendations
GROUP 5
Identification of the issue/problem
Well Researched and detailed analysis of problem
Evidence participation of Target group
Advocacy plan with clear timelines
Impact of advocacy work
10
ACTIVITY 2: Defining Public Policy
The facilitators stated first that the objectives of the exercise were to show that there are
no specific definitions of public policy but many common points or issues. Participants
were then directed to page 14 of the manual for an exercise in the attempt to define
what policy is. The facilitators added that there are three (3) main items to consider in
defining policy, which are Perspectives, Process and Policy community.
Perspectives
(Public Policy)
Policy Advocacy & Writing
People Process
(Policy Network) (Policy Making)
Some expressions were quoted to refer to public policy;
- Policy based on values or morals
- A framework which guides decision making
- Agreeing on a common point between citizens and government
- Rule of law from government
- Establishes link between problem and solution
- Identification of an issue, approaching it and finding adequate solution
The facilitators commented that definitions could be obtained from each of the above
mentioned words. Public Policy can be a mix up of all these things. But they also
advised that it is important in envisaging Advocacy to be able to identify who are
primary and secondary targets.
ACTIVITY 3: Structure of a Policy paper
This exercise was given to participants where they were divided into four groups,
namely the introduction group, problem description group, policy options group and the
conclusion and recommendation group. The table below was given to them to give them
an insight into what they are expected to do.
11
At the end of the group work, these were the summaries from each group:
Structure of a Policy Paper Introduction Purpose
To strengthen the reader’s interest at the initial stage while defining the main content of the policy paper in focusing on specific issues. Also to prepare the reader by setting the scene. What is included
Context of the policy problem
Definition of the policy problem
Statement of intent
Methodology and limitation of the study
Road map of the paper Other Important Points: Writers position should be clearly stated and clearly Stated goals and objectives
Problem Description
Purpose: To present an existing problem within a context that requires government action. What is Included:
Structural Features: this includes background on the problem and the problem within its current policy environment
Text and Augmentation: coherent problem that is convincing and easy to follow
A claim, support and warrant
Organised to suit topic, purpose and audience Other Important Points: Include a reference for all sources unless data is considered a common knowledge.
Elements of Policy
Brief
Movement in the argument Questions answered in each
part
Problem Description Problem Why Act?
Policy Options Solution What Strategy? (And what
not?)
Conclusions and
Recommendations
Application How to implement
12
Policy Options Purpose: The policy options elements presents various positions of preferred policy alternatives based on an assessment of all possible alternatives What is included:
Framework of analysis: this is a statement of the ideals of the values which guides the evaluation
Evaluation of policy alternatives: this provides a clear statement of and justification for positions taken
Other Important Points: In the policy option element, the writer’s voice should dominate. The way the options are evaluated depends on the expertise and creativity of the writer.
Conclusion Purpose:
To outline the measures proposed to solve the policy problems while fulfilling the role of a policy paper as a decision making tool.
To leave a lasting impression of the policy paper in the minds of the readers and help them to get a clear over view of the whole policy paper.
What is included:
Synthesis: - which highlights main points from the problem description and policy options.
Comparison to draw lessons learnt from the policy paper.
Personal opinion of the writer based on findings.
Concluding remarks completes and close the paper. Other Important Points: Structure of conclusion and recommendations varies from one writer to another.
Recommendations Recommendations are logical proposal and what approach could be used to make them clearly identifiable.
DAY TWO
Participants’ were given post- it to fill in what new thing or statement they had learnt on
the first day. It could be a sentence or just a word. This exercise took place for 5
minutes. The post-it filled were then submitted and distributed around each table such
that at least one that was filled by a participant on a particular table comes back to the
same table. A participant will then pick the paper and describe what word was written on
the paper while other members tried to guess what the word could be exactly. This
process goes round until all members of the table have picked a paper. This exercise
was done to make participants remember what they learnt individually and as a group.
After the exercise, there was a round-up on the whole exercise with every participants
13
reflecting on the first day and the following words were noted and which they elaborated
more on:
Analytical, purposive, course of action, goals, objectives, values, interest,