Jakarta Workshop Evaluation www.ecbproject.org

Context Context and methodology 21 participants from 6 organisations and 14 countries

Context Evaluation objectives Understanding topics covered Key learnings

What were the objectives? Bringing together members of the Standing Team to establish them as a team and provide them with the skills they would need in deployment to emergencies Clarifying the AIM elements Understanding our own role in deployment and for different activities that we may be deployed for Become advocates for accountability and make a commitment Sharing experiences on AIM in our work Best ways to capture learning, e.g. videos, and having this as an on-going activity Gain knowledge about the tools available Understanding the challenges and finding solutions through sharing of learning

What were the topics covered? Sharing specific examples (really liked this) – what is accountability, what is our role Shared around what some challenges were and discussed what advice they would give Learning about AIM elements Tools: there are various tools from different agencies that were presented in a chart and discussed, e.g. tools for evaluation. Within the group they identified tools they decided what they wanted to know more about Note what we can no longer do – Objective 2 support, partnerships

What were the key learnings? Tips on capturing the learning e.g. you don’t need to summarise on behalf of beneficiaries: you can film them Being advocates on accountability Learned about decision-making in field cases from different countries e.g. dealing with corruption – a participant presented the dilemma or scenario and 3 response options, then the group decided which one they would chose As a team we have different skills and we can share this amongst ourselves as ST members; building informal networks How do we distinguish between AIM in emergencies and in development. We agreed AIM is AIM! Different levels of skills meant that different participants learned different things, but the sharing of experiences was important Note what we can no longer do – Objective 2 support, partnerships

What were the gaps? People would have liked to go more into depth on some of the tools during the workshop, rather than scratching the surface. The blog addresses that to a degree, but more practical application or delving into the tools would have been useful. The ST coordinator said she’s compile tools into a package – not sure what happened on the follow up. Challenge was finding a balance in the tools to present – some wanted more, some wanted less but more in-depth Data analysis was a gap Note what we can no longer do – Objective 2 support, partnerships

What were the follow-ups done? In Zimbabwe, Oxfam had a meeting with management CD asked her to be accountability lead. In Mercy Corps an evaluation is underway and the ST member has been able to get accountability into the evaluation. In Indonesia there is a learning event that profiles accountability. Note what we can no longer do – Objective 2 support, partnerships

Recommendations Follow up on tool package promised Promote usage of the blog Objective on communication, facilitation and influencing skills didn’t come out  an area to strengthen? Note what we can no longer do – Objective 2 support, partnerships

Time Access to information sources was scanty Limitations Time Access to information sources was scanty Note what we can no longer do – Objective 2 support, partnerships