IAOD Evaluation Seminar “Demystifying Evaluation in WIPO- Best Practices from Initial Evaluations”

KENYA COUNTRY IP PORTFOLIO START UP NATIONAL IP ACADEMIES OGADA TOM Geneva November, 8 2012 2012

Contents 1. Role and Steps 2. Kenya Country IP Portfolio 3. Start up National IP Academy Project 4. Lessons Learned 5. Recommendations

Role and Steps 1. Role as external evaluator

a. To find answers to the questions identified in the terms of reference b.

To ensure that the exercise is carried such as to meet three evaluation objectives    Learning Participation Decision making c. Provide comfort to key stakeholders on the rationale of the exercise

Role and Steps 2. Steps followed in evaluation



Understanding the terms of reference

 

Inception Report Data collection

 

Data analysis Reporting

Role and Steps 3. Steps followed in evaluation cont

a. Understanding the terms of reference

 Purpose and utility  Scope  Resources available (time, HR, Finance)

b. Inception Report

 Key questions to be answered  Data collection methodology   Key respondents Limitations

Steps followed cont.

c. Data Collection

• Face to face • Questionnaire • Telephone/Skype

d. Data Analysis and evaluation criteria

• Program design and delivery strategy • Relevance • Effectiveness • Efficiency • Synergy • Sustainability

Steps followed cont.

e. Reporting

• Findings • Conclusions (#findings) • Recommendations (#findings and Conclusions)

Kenya IP Portfolio

Gerry Cooney – Team Leader Alessandra Narciso Tom Ogada 1. Background

 Kenya is viewed as a success story in IP in the region  Kenya has a long time collaboration with WIPO  WIPO has supported various IP (projects) portfolio since 1990’s  Evaluation focused on the period 2005-2010  Evaluation period: July 2012 to January 2012

Kenya IP Portfolio

Gerry Cooney – Team Leader Alessandra Narciso Tom Ogada 2. What was done

 Inception mission and interview in Geneva, Kenya and ARIPO       Data collection in Kenya and Geneva Data collection Presentation of initial findings in Kenya Presentation of revised report to Geneva Comments and suggestions Final report

Kenya IP Portfolio

Gerry Cooney – Team Leader Alessandra Narciso Tom Ogada 3. Results

 11 Findings   6 Conclusions 4 Recommendations

Finding 1

WIPO’s support to Kenya (2005-2010) was relevant to Kenyan development priorities and in line with the Kenyan development agenda)     Vision 2030 STI policy Industrialization Policy  Climate change strategy Trade

Relevance

Conclusion

Kenya still needs to do a lot to strengthen its IP system – e.g

 IP awareness  National IP Policy and Strategy  Review of IP laws  Development of new IP laws  Training and education in IP

Recommendation WIPO should continue its support in Kenya and make its future investments strategically in recognition of the evolving IP landscape and emerging needs.

Finding 2

Kenya had a much higher profile, stature, expertise and capacity in IP in 2010 than it did in 2005. Interviews with key Kenyan IP stakeholders credit WIPO with direct and indirect contributions to these positive changes.

Effectiveness

Conclusion

Through contribution from WIPO, Kenya made considerable progress in the development of IP in 2005-10. Today, Kenya is regarded as a leader in IP in the African continent. However past support has focused on IP Offices

Recommendation To meet the growing and evolving needs for IP support in Kenya, WIPO should extend its support beyond KIPI and KECOBO to other IP stakeholders such universities, research organizations and ACA

Finding 6 WIPO contributions to building the IP capacity of individuals and national IP offices are generally being sustained. Noted shortcomings include some orphaned WIPO projects in Kenya as well as inadequate support from the government

Sustainability

Conclusion

WIPO’s direct and indirect support are being sustained by targeted institutions and individuals. However, the sustainability of WIPO infrastructural projects can be a problem when the govt’s commitment for ongoing support is not obtained at the initiation of projects

Recommendation

WIPO should enhance the sustainability of its activities by developing government supported exit strategies

Challenges

1. Lack of documented information on support given or received.

2.

Weak M&E system in beneficiary country 4.

5.

6.

Involving three experts from three continents  Managing calendars   Time difference Difficulty in agreeing on the style and depth of the report Making acceptable recommendations to key the Stakeholders.

Slow feedback on the report

Startup IP Academy Tom Ogada

1. Background

 Project initiated in 2009 to assist DC and LDC to establish their own IP academy  Project piloted in four countries (Dominican Republic, Peru, Colombia and Tunisia)  If successful scale up would follow  Evaluation covered period 2009-2012

Startup IP Academy Tom Ogada

2. What was done

 Inception mission and interview in Geneva.

 Face to face data collection in Geneva  Data collection through questionnaire from the beneficiaries   Comments and suggestions  Presentation of initial findings in Geneva Final report

Startup IP Academy Tom Ogada

3. Results

 6 Findings   7 Conclusions 4 Recommendations

Finding 1

The project

Project design and implementation

document was appropriate for use as a guide for the

Conclusion

The project document as was designed, together implementation of the pilot projects during phase I but will need further improvements to make it more appropriate for continued use in the project implementation in phase II with the improvements so far undertaken, will require further modification to be appropriate for use as a guide for the implementation of the project in phase II

Recommendations

The project document, together with improvements made so far, be further modified by the

WIPO Academy

to provide clarity and make the process more efficient, flexible and demand driven

Finding 2

The objectives of the National IP startup Academy Project are highly relevant to the needs of the Member States, the country’s IP institutions, individual beneficiary from the members and the WIPO’s Development Agenda recommendations

Relevance

Conclusion

The project is relevant to the needs and aspirations of most developing and least developed countries. Although the piloting process has not been completed , the validity of the project concepts has been proven

Recommendations 1.

2.

The CDIP

agrees that the pilot process be completed and extended for two years.

That consideration be given by

Member States

on the future direction of the project beyond the end of phase II, so as to meet future requests from Member States and to consider a gradual phasing out of the ongoing cooperation

Challenges IP Startup Academy

1. Language and communication questionnaires 3. Low questionnaires return rate 4. No opportunity for feedback from the beneficiaries on the initial findings 5. Limited time and resources

Lessons learned

1. Culture of M&E not yet developed amongst the key stakeholders.

2. Inception phase very important telephone interviews are preferred 4. Successful evaluation depends on the support given by the client 5. Preparation of the stakeholders for the evaluation is important 6. Strong documentation facilitates quality evaluation 7. Managing inception interview 8. Prompt feedback on report

Recommendations

1. Deepen the culture of evaluation amongst WIPO staff and the partners (beneficiaries) 3. Improve on the management of evaluation process   Stakeholders preparation Provide for enough time and resources for data collection  Provide for active review of the initial findings, conclusions and recommendations by the beneficiaries  Promote use of evaluation results

THANK YOU