ToP training for Timor Leste NGOs

Prepared by Karen Newkirk
Karen Newkirk is President, ICA Australia.

Overview

Partners in training
Forum ONG Timor Leste (FONGTIL) is the umbrella organisation for all local, national and international NGOs operating in Timor-Leste. Currently, there are over 450 member organisations across Timor-Leste’s 13 Districts. FONGTIL’s role, identified in the mandate from its members, is to facilitate the work of member organizations via information dissemination, coordination, advocacy and capacity-building.

Training on Technology of Participation FONGTIL was held in June 2012 through working together with ICA Australia with David Jago, Karen Newkirk and Helen Ritchie as the trainers. Two months after the training FONGTIL and ICAA held again a follow up training for ToP alumni for discussion Method and the Consensus Workshop Method; the foundational ToP methods. This time ICAA trainers didn’t come to Timor-Leste, yet they provided the support through email and skype.

Agreed Objectives
Strengthen knowledge and skills for 13 district NGOs, 2 NGO Networks and 16 FONGTIL staff especially District Liaison Officers (DLOs) in their approach in communities through Technology of Participation (ToP).

Funding Sources
US Embassy: Follow up ToP training for FONGTIL staff, DLOS and Members

Agreed responsibilities of ICA

  • The role of ICA, in consultation with the Capacity Building Officer, is to:
  • Develop an evaluation process to docu-ment change in attitudes, knowledge and skills based on the training.
  • Using the training workshop evaluation, identify key successes, lessons learned and suggestions for future training.
  • Provide input on the review process for training participants two month after the training.

Key Outputs

  1. Three FONGTIL staff prepared the follow up process with assistance from ICA trainers.
  2. Participants from FONGTIL staff and members (from 13 districts) participated in follow up process to get more idea and also to refresh the idea on ToP foundational group facilitation methods.
  3. Advice on review process and follow up.

Performance Indicators

  • How many participants attend the follow up training workshop.
  • Documentation of the application of the methods (two months after the training).

Timeframe
The preparation for the follow up training and consultation with the ICAA trainers David Jago and Helen Ritchie on Saturday, 25 August 2012 followed by the Floow up ToP training program Monday 27-28 August 2012 with 22 participants.
Venue: in FONGTIL Conference Room.

Follow up ToP training Schedule 27-28 August 2012

  • Day 1. Refresh the idea about ToP methods, sharing experiences on ToP application during 2 months, demonstrate, explore and practice Discussion Method, Practice the discussion method.
  • Day 2.  Demonstrate, explore and practice the Workshop method. Plan for application ToP method and participants feedback.

FONGTIL deeply appreciates services provided by ICAA.

Support from FONGTIL:

  • Transport from districts and local transportation were provided to participants.
  • Training venue (FONGTIL meeting room).
  • Lunches, morning and afternoon teas were provided for the participants.
  • Printing of resource packs and evaluation sheet for the participants.

Report of Events

Co-facilitator Preparation for the Follow up
The preparation started at 9.30 am by seeing together the plan on the schedule. Then we define the topics for workshop and discussion and also discussion on the Practical result, rational aims and experience aims. Prepared also question for each discussion topic and also the workshop topics. It was as process for the co-facilitator to refresh their ideas on ToP and also try to prepare the ToP follow up by themselves. Then at the end on the day we had a discussion on the preparation with ICAA trainers David Jago and Helen Ritchie by Skype. It provided more understanding and more confident for the co-facilitator to run the follow up process on 27-28 of August 2012.

Monday, 27 August
The training was started at 9.20 am with the 21 participants form ToP alumni and also 2 volunteers of FONGTIL joint training just to get some idea about ToP. At the beginning the facilitator presented the idea about the follow up process for two days and presented the schedule of two days. The process started with checking again the idea about ToP by prepared some question related to the ToP material and asking each participants, it was a good process because everybody try to remember and answered the question provided (in this session we call it as “breakfast”).

After that session, we did the demonstration on Discussion method but actually the original plan was just to ask some questions to get the participants shared about the experiences in applying the ToP method, yet it was turning into the discussion demonstration and it took longer than our prediction. Yet, we had a good discussion in this process. During 2 months there were 3 participants practiced this method to their target groups. They were DLO Lospalos, DLO Coordinator and the Participant from Caritas Baucau.

We broke into two groups only and used only the FONGTIL meeting room. The topic was on “The programs implemented by NGO in rural areas”. Each space had a sticky wall. The teams did not include the Facilitators. Group 1 was facilitated by Elsa Pinto and group 2 facilitated by Cornelio do Rosario and Cesario Amaral. We got the time to practice discussion method once only. The participants got the chance to planning a discussion, leading a discussion and providing and receiving feedback on a discussion.

At the end of the day we checked again the challenges that were shared by the participants we have applied the ToP methods, try to make sure did it clear to them after the demonstration and practice the discussion method. Then we close the day by having a reflexion on the first day in the big group.

One long discussion happened in the morning when we did the discussion demonstration. Many questions were raising and mostly form one participants, he was not able to understand on how to form the questions for the decision and interpretative, it all the same for him. What happen was all the participants were trying to explain to him about the Interpretative and Decision and also the way to form it. It was a great of cooperation from all the participants to share their own idea and to make sure that all the participants got the same understanding. It took long time but at the end everybody was clear.

Tuesday, 28 August
Tuesday; demonstration workshop method in big group and practice the Workshop Method in the two group. In the practice process the group did the planning workshops, leading a workshop and providing and receiving feedback on a workshop.

Workshop Method topics:

  • What were the success points did by the IV government of RDTL in education sector? (Demonstration).
  • The components that support the sustainability of NGO. (practice)

Sixteen participants had the opportunity to practice the Discussion Method or the Workshop method and demonstrated varying levels of understanding of and skill in these methods. The other participants were not able to practice because of the short time. Most of the participants showed a very good understanding and confident in using these 2 methods and they.

Feedback Forms Summary
27 participants: 14 from FONGTIL, 8 from districts outside Dili & 3 FONGTIL DLO, 2 Volunteer of FONGTIL 9 (new participants).

18 participants filled the evaluation sheet. (not including the Co-facilitators).
The following includes only a summary of responses

What was your experience in using the Discussion Method? (What was the group, what was the topic, how did it go?)

  • I haven’t used it yet.
  • I presented it for the target group.
  • The groups were:
a)   Members in Oe-cusse district b)  Members in Maliana District.
c)   Target group in Baucau.
d)   Target group in Lautem special for parents group and
      the workers of the government project.
  • The topics were on:
a)  The role of NGO in doing the monitoring for the projects.
b)  The Natural Desaster
c)   Involve the civil society in the development process
d)  The relationship between Government and NGO
e)  The evaluation for the target group in Baucau on the Rice
     Production and the issues that need to be address
f)   The result of the project that beneficiate the community.
  • All the meetings went well. It was so good because I got many people involved in the discussion process, even those women who never speak or share their ideas, they shared their opinions this time.

What aspects are you most confident about in using TOP methods?

  • Discussion method.
  • Facilitate the training in the community.
  • I feel happier and relaxed when using ToP method to facilitate the meetings.
  • It is so effective and simple.
  • It engages the participation of the community members.

What aspects are you least confident about in using ToP methods?

  • Workshop method.
  • When I have to meet some community leader to provide and run this method.
  • Meet the community members.
  • It quite hard for me to understand it quickly.
  • Wrong interpretation from the participants.

What would you like to tell Helen, Karen & David now?

  • Continue the training on Module 2 and 3.
  • Need the support from Australia to provide the Sticky wall.
  • Need to support and ensure this training will be continue through FONGTIL and also need to facilitate us to get some material, module and some funds to be able to run this training.
  • Would like to thank three of them for sharing this ToP Material to all of us and I recommended to continue this training. II

What further training or support would you like in using ToP methods?

  • Need to use ToP method in the Leadership training for the young people.
  • The training on the financial manual by using the discussion method.
  • Public speaking. IIII
  • Simple Module on ToP method.
  • For all the NGO in Timor and Alolo Foundation.
  • Need to follow up.
  • How to write result of the discussion and the workshop?

Who else in Timor Leste would benefit from ToP training like you ?

  • FONGTIL staffs, Network, NGO members and target groups.
  • Government institution.
  • Community leaders.
  • Young people.


Evaluation Summary

Next Step/ evaluation
It was agreed that FONGTIL would find the way to continue the follow up and possible to run in the district level. It will be doing in consultation with ICAA.

Summary of Learning for Future Training

Strengths
The Methods were understood. The follow up process really helped all participants to refresh their idea and understanding on the methods. It provided the space to share among the participants, for those we had applied and also for those we haven’t.
Participants learned from each other’s ideas and challenges in applying ToP methods.
Participants felt engaged in their learning and felt more motivated to apply the methods in their daily work.

Things to improve
Need more time.
Need to define together the topics, practical result, rational aims and experiential aims.
In this stage, still some people struggled to understand the ‘Practical Result, Rational Aim and Experiential Aim’.

Recommendations

  • Make Repositioning spray available for sticky walls.
  • Use masking tape and bluetac to demonstrate use with readily accessible materials (so it feels less foreign). We have shown it to the participants (bluetac and just stick it to the wall).
  • Manual needs simplifying to less pages and use of consistent terms.
  • The participants really need to read the manual.

Make a comment on this article (Please name article in your comment)