IFIP RM Evaluation

8/12/2019 IFIP RM Evaluation

1/16

2014 International Funders for

Indigenous Peoples NYC Regional

MeetingEvaluation response for March 5 luncheon on Food Sover eignty,

and March 6 full day regional meeting.


2/16

2014 IFIP New York March 5thRegional Meeting Evaluation

Results and Recommendations

Question #1: I have a greater awareness of why and how to engage with

Indigenous communities?

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response

Result:

When asked if the survey takers felt if they had a greater awareness of why and how to engage with indigenous

communities, 2 out of 17 survey takers felt that they somewhat agreed, 10 out of 17 survey takers felt they

agreed, and 5 out of the 17 survey takers felt they strongly agree. Therefore on average majority of the group

felt this was covered with the session.

Question #2: I have a greater awareness of funding strategies to address

climate change and food resilience in Indigenous communities?

Result:

0

2

4

6

8

10


When asked if the survey takers felt they had a greater awareness of funding strategies to address climate

change and food resilience 1 participant did not agree, 8 somewhat agreed, 6 agreed and 2 strongly agreed

Therefore the majority of the survey takers somewhat agreed that this session covered the awareness of funding

strategies to address climate change and food resilience in Indigenous communities.

1


3/16

Question #3: I have a greater awareness of what IFIP believes in and its

core activities?

0

1

2

34

5

6

7

8

9


Result:

When asked if the survey takers felt they had a greater awareness of what IFIP believes in and its core activities3 out of 17 survey takers somewhat agree, 6 out of 17 survey takers agreed, and 8 out of 17 survey takers

strongly agreed. Therefore the majority of the survey takers strongly agreed they had a greater awareness ofwhat IFIP believes in and its core activities.

Question #4: The Session created meaningful opportunities for me to

interact with members of IFIP?

Result:

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7


When asked if the survey takers felt if the session created a meaningful opportunity for me to interact with

members of IFIP 1 out of 17 survey takers felt it did not, 6 out of 17 survey takers felt they could somewhat

agree to this, 5 out of 17 survey takers agreed, and 5 out of 17 survey takers strongly agreed. Therefore the

majority of the survey takers felt they somewhat felt an opportunity to interact with members of IFIP.

2


4/16

Question #5: How would I rate my speakers?

Evelyn Arce

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


Shaun Paul

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


Fatima Jibrell

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14


3


5/16

Valentina Dmitrieva

0

2

4

6

8

10


Pablo Miss

0

2

4

68

10

12

14

16


Nikhil Aziz

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14


Result:

When asked how the survey takers felt about each of the speaker, majority of the 17 survey takers felt the

speakers did a wonderful job in presentations overall.

4


6/16

Question #6: The content of the session on Climate Change and Food

resilience was appropriate and informative?

0

1

2

34

5

6

7

8

9


Result:

When asked if the survey takers felt if the content of the session on Climate Change and Food resilience was

appropriate and informative; 2 out of 17 survey takers somewhat agreed, 8 out of 17 survey takers agreed and 7

out of 17 survey takers strongly agreed. Therefore majority of the survey takers agreed that the content of thesessions on Climate Change and Food resilience was appropriate and informative.

Question #8: What topics would you like to see at future sessions?

Result:

Marine and coastal communities who are indigenous and over by illegal.

Supporting and working with indigenous youth How to resist agribusiness campaign against rational indigenous food production. More information about funders and funding strategies Still learning More about environmental use being done at the country lead New Networks of Knowledge Intersection of arts/culture and ecology More detail on the topic like food sovereignty Women Leadership Governance/advocacy Same topic but more in depth and concrete

5


7/16

Question #9: What did you like the most about the session?

Result:

Substance, friendly and feel commitment from many The Panelists Voices from very different places and how they leave their community work naturally with issues of

environment

Small Size Good Conversation That such different regions and problems were represented Fatima Paul information foreign agent The variety of perspectives and the fact that speakers came from so far to offer their prospects Speakers perspectives were so broad Great presenters The concrete examples and stores both of problems and solutions The panelists first-hand experience were fascinating, especially Pablo and Fatima The ability to network and to hear perspectives from people who work on the ground Well-timed sessions; diversity of regions represented Discussion of soverence

Question #10: What did you like the least about the session?

Result:

Not as much opportunity to interact with fellow attendees Topics more scattered Physical layout made seeing presenters more challenging Need more time but well have that tomorrow Too Short That I have previous knowledge of the amazing area where Valentina is from but her talk was hard to

follow, not as engaging, maybe visually important.

6


8/16

Question #11: Would you attend another session co-hosted by IFIP?

Result:

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Responses

Yes

No

No Answer

Maybe

When asked if the survey takers would attend another session co-hosted by IFIP, 11 out of 17 survey takers

responded that they would return to another session co-hosted by IFIP if there was one, and 6 out of 17 survey

takers did not answers.

Question #12: Would you recommend the session to your colleagues?

Another Topic?

Result:

0

2

4

6

8

10

Yes

No

No Answer

When asked if the survey takers would recommend the session to their colleagues, 10 out of 17 survey takers

responded that they would recommend the IFIP sessions to their colleague as 7 out of 17 survey takers did not

answer.

Question #13: What funders should IFIP invite to future sessions?

Result:

I dont know was the only answer reported7


9/16

2014 IFIP New York March 6thRegional Meeting Evaluation

Results and Recommendations

Question #1: I have a greater awareness of why and how to engage with

Indigenous communities?

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


Result:

When asked if the survey takers felt if they had a greater awareness of why and how to engage with indigenous

communities, 2 out of 18 survey takers felt that they somewhat agreed, 6 out of 18 survey takers felt they

agreed, and 10 out of the 18 survey takers felt they strongly agree. Therefore on average majority of the group

felt they strongly agreed they have a greater awareness of why and how to engage with Indigenous

communities.

Question #2: I have a greater awareness of funding strategies to address

climate change and food resilience in Indigenous communities?

Result:

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8


When asked if the survey takers felt they had a greater awareness of funding strategies to address climate

change and food resilience 1 participant did not respond, 4 somewhat agreed, 7 agreed and 6 strongly agreed.

8


10/16

Therefore the majority of the survey takers agreed that this session covered the awareness of funding strategies

to address climate change and food resilience in Indigenous communities.

Question #3: I have a greater awareness of what IFIP believes in and its

core activities?

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


Result:

When asked if the survey takers felt they had a greater awareness of what IFIP believes in and its core activities

2 out of 18 survey takers somewhat agree, 7 out of 18 survey takers agreed, and 10 out of 18 survey takers

strongly agreed. Therefore the majority of the survey takers strongly agreed they had a greater awareness of

what IFIP believes in and its core activities.

Question #4: Did the Session created meaningful opportunities for me to

interact with members of IFIP?

Result:

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


When asked if the survey takers felt if the session created a meaningful opportunity for me to interact with

members of IFIP 2 out of 18 survey takers felt they could somewhat agree to this, 5 out of 18 survey takers

agreed, and 11 out of 18 survey takers strongly agreed. Therefore the majority of the survey takers felt they

strongly felt an opportunity to interact with members of IFIP.

9


11/16

Question #5: Were you satisfied with Grant-makers Guide?

Result:

0

2

4

6

8

10


When asked if the survey takers felt if they were satisfied with the Grant-makers Guide, 5 out of 18 survey

takers felt they could agree to this, 9 out of 18 survey takers strongly agreed, and 4 out of 18 survey takers did

not respond. Therefore the majority of the survey takers felt they strongly were satisfied with the grand-makers

guide.

Question #6: How would I rate my speakers?

Evelyn Arce

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


Shaun Paul

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14


10


12/16

Fatima Jibrell

0

5

10

15

20


Valentina Dmitrieva

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14


Pablo Miss

0

5

10

15

20


Suzanne Pelletier

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14


Result:

When asked how the survey takers felt about each of the speaker, majority of the 18 survey takers felt the

speakers did a wonderful job in presentations overall.

11


13/16

Question #7: the content of the session on the Grant-makers Guide was

appropriate and informative?

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14


Result:

When asked if the survey takers felt if the if the content of the session the Grant-Makers Guide was appropriate

and informative 12 out of 18 survey takers felt they could somewhat agree to this, 3 out of 18 survey takers

agreed, 12 out of 18 survey takers strongly agreed, and 2 out of 18 survey takers had no response. Therefore themajority of the survey takers strongly felt the content of the session the Grant-Makers Guide was appropriate

and informative.

Question #8: The content of the session on Climate Change and Food

resilience was appropriate and informative?

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


Result:When asked if the survey takers felt if the content of the session on Climate Change and Food resilience was

appropriate and informative; 7 out of 18 survey takers agreed, 10 out of 18 survey takers strongly agreed, and 1

had no response. Therefore majority of the survey takers strongly agreed that the content of the sessions on

Climate Change and Food resilience was appropriate and informative.

12


14/16

Question #9: What topics would you like to see at future Regional

Meetings?

Result:

How to measure success Success stories Traditional Knowledge Water protection Sacred lands Traditional knowledge Indigenous Media Poverty and income Assessments method of projects of IP Post 2015 Agenda Indigenous Peoples in Brazil

Marine Issues IPs rights to land When and how funders and indigenous groups can benefit from organizations

Question #8: What did you like the most about the session?

Result:

Speakers Opportunity to hear from others Panelists-Especially Speakers and Informal networking Nice to have a small group Wisdom in the room Direct discussion points NY Based The opportunity to learn from others and networking Different ecologic perspective Interaction with others Funders engaging on process that challenges IP access to funds Example of experience by IPS representatives

13


15/16

Question #8: What did you like the least about the session?

Result:

PowerPoints Time pressure on speakers No room for break out opportunity Lack of direct funders grantee discussion Too short

Question #9: Would you attend another regional meeting by IFIP?

Result:

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Responses

Yes

No

No Answer

Maybe

When asked if the survey takers would attend another regional meeting with IFIP, 12 out of 18 survey takers

responded that they would return to another regional meeting if there was one, 1 out of 18 survey takers stated

they may return, and 5 did not respond to the survey.

14


16/16

Question #10: Would you recommend the session to your colleagues?

Result:

0

5

10

15

Yes

No

No Answer

Maybe

When asked if the survey takers would recommend a regional meeting with IFIP, eight out of eight survey

takers responded that they would recommend the IFIP regional meeting and/or conference to other possible

survey takers.

Question #11: What funders should IFIP invite to future sessions?

Result:

Rockefeller Brothers Packard Jessie smith Noyes

Hewlett Foundation Oak foundation Ford Foundation Swift Foundation USAID MacArthur Oak (swiss) Foundation Rockefeller Foundation Gates International Foundations and Funders

15

IFIP RM Evaluation

Documents

Transcript of IFIP RM Evaluation