Focus Networks' Workshop - Sept 2005
From Harambee Wiki
Many thanks to the workshop participants and Allen Gunn of [Aspiration] for making this workshop a success.
Participants at the workshop invite you to meet them at the Harambee People page. You can also see the HarambeePedia for new words that may be useful in the future ;-)
Contents |
Day One
Day Two
Morning Session
After the spectrogram, we went back into the Harambee Break Out Group. Wambua walked us through the goals and we broke up into two groups, along the lines of ECA-supported and APC-supported networks. Its interesting to note that the 2 groups were also divided along the line of gender -- with the men being at the ECA-supported network, and the women at the APC-supported network.
The groups returned after intense discussions, and merged ideas on the goals. The shared goals were then presented to the joint plenary of the Harambee BreakOut Group and GKP BreakOut Group. The shared goals discussed follow:
(a) Better understanding of Harambee project up to today We agreed that there is a need to go through the proposal (vision and mission); have common understanding; clarify roles, responsibilities and relationships and develop them fruther; have a strategic mandate; envision clear outputs; and identify present concerns and activities.
(b) Develop a clear preliminary engagment plan for networks We agreed to identify needs (Knowledge Sharing & ICTs); ensure that needs are presented as problems; identify priority areas (focus netowrks to project, commonalities, project to focus networks); and developing outlines plans for focus networks which forms the basis of engagement.
(c) Develop a self-assessment, monitoring and evaluation tool We discussed the need for documnetation; identifying platforms for knowledge sharing; and using of matrix model.
(d) Identify criteria and principles to feed into the development of small grants fund.
Afternoon Session
After lunch, we discussed the possibility of planning ahead for Monday's program.
- Opening Circle (9:00 - 9:30am)
- Session 1: Presentation of the Harambee project (9:30 - 10:10am)
- Discussing the ideal network and collaboration
- Vision and philosophical foundation
- Strategies and activities
- Time, sustainability and resources
- Players (governing partners, focus networks and donors)
- Tea Break (10:10 - 10:30)
- Session 2: Critique & Validation of the Harambee project (10:30 - 11:05am).
- One on one (15 minutes)
- Open space -- Report back for new ideas (20 minutes)
- Session 3: Needs Identification (11:05 - 11:45am)
- Knowledge Sharing and ICTs (Group work - APC and ECA networks)
- Report back to joint APC and ECA networks
- Session 4: Priorities' identification (11:45 - 12:35pm)
- Group work (Focus networks)
- Report back to joint APC and ECA networks
- Concensus building (plenary)
- Session 5: Generating indicators for measuring results (Whole PM)
- Focus network level
- Project level
- AH-facilitated process (Output: Self-assessment tool)
- Session 6: Documentation and Knowledge networking + information platforms (30 minutes)
- JR-facilitated session
- Session 7: Focus networks complete template in small groups and come together for Peer Assist in plenary (2 hours)
- Session 8: Identify criteria and principles for development of small grants fund (1 hour)
Day Three
Morning Session
We began the day with self re-introductions and a one-phrase description of how each person feels this morning, led by Dorothy. The feelings ranged from anticipation to guilt :)
Wambua led the first session on telling the ideal network story, with tips such as:
- Landscape: Where was the network formed? When?
- Dwelling Place: Location where the network was formed.
- Characters: Who were involved in the formation? (Founders)
- Challenge: What problems triggered the formation?
- Actions: Give sequence of events that followed the formation and the turning point(s).
We proceeded by breaking into three groups of 3 people each, with each person telling their own network story to others based on the tips discussed earlier. Group formations follow:
- Jenny, APC-AW
- Theodore, AYIN
- Wambua, CRECO
- Mba, Academia
- Angela, Linux Chix
- Gonetti, WOUGNET
- Chiatoh, Academia
- Cissy, WOUGNET
- 'Gbenga, AYIN
The groups returned to the plenary and we had reports from group representatives. 'Gbenga reported back for Group 3, Angela reported for Group 2, and Wambua reported for Group 1. WOUGNET already has 82 women groups on-board, the Academia Network has finalised arrangements to have a common (pan-African) postgraduate studies in African languages in 5 Universities. LinuxChix Africa promotes FOSS as a means of empowering women. AYIN seeks to empower Africa's youth around ICT4D issues and operates online. CRECO members came together to address issues such as civic education, political security and constitutional participation.
We proceeded to discuss network commonalities, challenges and excitements. This was followed by an exchange of experiences and observations.
After the coffee break, Allison spoke about the philosophical foundations Harambee project. In 2003, there was a meeting of PICTA members. A group of members (ECA, APC, Bellanet and Connectivity Africa)came together to create a knowledg sharing consortium. The group met a year later t decide how the consortium will work. Harambee seeks to find ways to work together more effectively (online and face-to-face), and creating spaces using appropriate ICTs. Jennifer talked about APC's involvement along the lines of their work -- knowledge sharing platform, without de-emphassing face to face knowlege sharing. APC will also love to see how Harambee outcomes can feed into policy processes. Mohammed spoke about ECA's intervention along the lines of the implementation of the Afrcan Information Society Initiative.
We moved on to the next spot in the room, where Dorothy introduced the objectives of the Harambee project. The objectives include:
- Strengthen existing networks and collaboration in Africa as a result of increasing their access to relevant training and support for sharing knowledge and ICT-related capacity development;
- Build expertise, based largely in Africa, in the design and implementation of collaborative processes, including conflict resolution and mediation processes, as these are often critical to sustaining partnerships over time;
- Raise awareness of African organisations on the potential for collaborative processes to strengthen their collective capacity to effect change;
- Create a body of research that will act as a valuable resource on a variety of techniques, conceptual frameworks, indicators, etc, relating to facilitation, knowledge sharing, communication and other collaboration-related issues such as gender considerations.
Discussions on the objectives followed, and a major highlight was the need to increase awareness on the value of collaboration among donors. The idea of managing online facilitation was also mentioned -- especially encouraging voices to be heard in the online space. This will be discussed further during the session on Critique and Validation of the Harambee project.
We migrated to the last spot, where Riff spoke about Harambee Implementation (phase 1). He started by saying that phase 2 of the project is subject to modification. The discussion centred around:
- Outreach Strategy, led by Bellanet Africa (AITEC Uganda). The activities include informaing others, design Harambee website, develop governance policy, ensure targeted partnership development.
- Small Grants Fund, led by Bellanet Africa. Activities include its link to outreach (awareness), developing criteria for selection, creation of online mechanism, and strategy for engagement of fund recipients.
- Web-Based Resources, led by APC. This includes discussion and archives, training materials, and project-related outputs.
- Research led by APC. This includes identifying relevant resources, link research strategy to project strategy, focus networks/SGF output, and identifying priority areas (eg. gender hierarchies with respect to collaboration).
- Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning, led by Bellanet Africa. This will help enhance ongoing learning, promote dynamic project development, and enable project assessment.
- Network Facilitation Training and Focus Network Plan Development, led by APC, Bellanet and ECA. This involves hands-on training for immediate use, feed into design of workplan workshop, and reduce costs.
- Support for Focus Network Plan Implementation (and Small Grants Fund), led by APC, Bellanet and ECA. This emphasises the need for projects to work closely with focus networks, nature/level/timing of support to be determined through dialogue, and ensure broad accessibility through Small Grants Fund (SGF).
- Phase 1 and Phase 2 Workshop, to bring SGF recipients and focus networks together in order to evaluate phase 1 and ensure that phase 2 is implemented efficiently.
Afternoon Session
After lunch, the group returned to plenary and immediately broke up into groups of two's to draft a list of benefits, concerns and questions on the Harambee project. The four groups eventually merged into two groups and reported back to the plenary. After a brief coffee break (best coffee of the week, according to Allen), we retunrned to plenary and considered what the indicators of a successful network are. We broke up into three groups of 3's and drew up eight indices of successful networks from each group. We regrouped the indicators under similar headings and came up with the following indicators:
- Regular Assessment and Evaluation
- Regular assessment
- Regular evaluation and reflections
- Management of Internal Relationships
- Ability of network to resolve conflict
- Support from within the networks
- Mentoring relationships between members
- Applying Local and Appropriate Solutions
- Appropriate technology
- Networks delivering on targets using local means
- Attract and Generate Resources
- Attracts donor support (local and external)
- Secure financial base
- Ability for the network to generate income (for sustainability)
- Interest from donors and other networks
- Information Management
- Good track record of activities
- Knowledge accumulated documented
- Number of outputs and generated resources
- Visibility
- Visibility of network in medial and social fora
- Increased visibility via website
- Positive feedback of critics/stakeholders
- Collaboration
- Implementation of successful joint activities and projects
- Collective efforts on projects and initiatives
- Active member participation
- High attendance of members in network activities
- Level of participation (in f2f, online, etc)
- Increased communication among members (email etc.)
- Growth in quality of membership
- Governance (parked)
After the exercise, we discussed the need to identify needs of focus networks against the identified indicators ahead of tomorrow's session.
Day Four
Morning Session
We strated the day with self-expressions (some noise that represents how you feel), and continued with the needs assessment by breaking up into two groups in order to identify network needs. We returned to plenary and heard from each network on needs, and the went back into focus groups to identify priorities.
After the coffee break, focus networks continued with their needs assessment, and then returned to plenary to share the problem they consider most important with the plenary. The peer-assit methodology was very interesting and brought dynamism into the process, even though in a usual setting, people would have been cautious with lowering their guards and being vulnerable in the presence on other networks. Each focus network confirmed that the peer-review session helped them identify solutions to problems -- some of them discovered while they were sharing the problems.
The peer-assist sessions are chronicled for each focus network:
See Peer Assist Tips for more information on organising and facilitating a peer assist session.
Afternoon Session
Critical Feedback
Following additional work on the Action Plans, we had a general discussion to highlight any concerns that were raised in the development of the Action Plans. Two points were raised. Jenny felt that the needs assessment process was quite useful in the development of the plans. Blasius shared his thoughts on the difficulty of developing action plans. In his case, Academia is interested in training people in the use of ICTs, in building websites and managing them. Should these be together or broken down in subcomponents? How do we quantify? Riff thought that it would make most sense to look at communication needs within the network first. Following that, information management needs could be addressed. Exploring both areas would create a better understanding what ICTs would be appropriate.
Budget and Governance
Riff led the group through a general discussion on the budget. The following points were noted:
- Hope to have the final proposal into the funders by the end of the month
- Resources can only be made available once the funding has been approved (hopefully next month)
- The budget in the proposal was put together as a last minute adjustment to this workshop to take into account because we weren’t sure if Hivos would be in a partnership
- Estimate an overall budget of $600,000USD
Role of the coordinating team
The coordinating team will be accountable to the donors (CA and Hivos). Funding from CA will be channeled through Bellanet International while Hivos funding will be channeled through Bellanet Africa. Decisions related to the allocation of funds will be the responsibility of the team. This implies that the coordinating team will need to approve the workplans of the Focus Networks.
Funds available to the Focus Networks
- Development and implementation of the Focus Networks’ workplans. This would amount to $5000 - $10,000USD but can’t apply to the work done in the past week.
- Training or other activities. A contractual relationship would need to be created between Bellanet and the Focus Networks (or org). This should amount to $15,000 - $20,000USD.
- Planning for the second phase
Questions from the session
Q: Can the budget be converted into something else ie. Creco’s time is already covered? A: Focus Networks could leverage by sub-contracting others to do network activities. There is no fixed funding amount for each network.
Q: Who identifies what research will be undertaken by Harambee. Can the topics come from the networks? A: Absolutely. We are thinking about these things in the context of what we do so if the FNs can be involved in other Harambee activities, that would be great.
Q: Can we have a mailing list and contact information of all Harambee. A: Yes. We should discuss this in the closing section.
Q: Can you clarify the funding to the Focus Networks to put together the work plans and the implementation of the plans?
A: We can’t fund participation at this workshop but there is $5000 - $10,000USD available for developing and implementing the workplans. The person days that can be allocated to the workplan could involve other members of the network. For example, funds could be sub-contracted to members within the network.
Q: From now, is there a timeframe for the complete development of the workplan? A: Can’t answer that now since our plans are dependent on funding.
Q: Can we go back to look at resource limitations. Have we covered that? A: We didn’t get into that but it comes into the discussion on criteria. We need to agree on criteria for workplans but the project is intended to strengthen the network not the institution. Focus on knowledge sharing and ICTs
Next Steps
- It was agreed that the Coordinating Team should go ahead and submit the proposal to the funders and forward it to the FNs at the same time. Wambua pointed out that the changes that FNs might want to include will be changes that we can make after the funding has been received.
- Add FN representatives to the Dgroup (http://www.dgroups.org/groups/harambee-focus-networks
- For now, it was agreed that we keep the Dgroup closed to Harambee Funders. There were mixed feelings about opening the space. There was some discussion whether or not the donors should be added to the list. There were arguments for both sides. There are power imbalances that need to be taken into account. It was pointed out that when funders are included in a space, competitive dynamics surface. On the other hand, we should be building a relationship that shows trust and transparency which means that we should open up our space to include donors. In the end, it was decided to keep the list closed. The rationale is that we are still building relationships among the FN representatives. Since it is expected that the donors are more interested in the programmatic outputs, we could exclude them from now but revisit the the issue in a few months to see how people feel at that point in time.
- Coordination team will be working on the following:
- Specific requirements for the workplan should be completed by the team by the end of Oct
- Criteria for the SGF
- Outreach strategy
- Revisit the plan for the next 6 months
- Establish contracts with the FNs
- Focus Networks
- Save all documentation to a flash or add it to the Harambee wiki ie. peer assists, action plans
