2013 IFIP January Regional Meeting Evaluation Results and Recommendations

Question #1: Do you have greater awareness of why and how to engage with indigenous communities? Result:
10 8 8 6 6 4 2 2 0 0 1. Not Meet Expectations 2. Somewhat Met Expectations 3. Met Expectations 4. Surpassed Expectations No Answer 1

Almost half of the participants felt that the regional meeting surpassed their expectation, of greater awareness and knowledge on how to interact more effectively with Indigenous communities.

Question #2: Do you have greater awareness of funding strategies to address the intersection of food sovereignty and climate change in indigenous communities? Result:
6 5 4 3 2 1 0 5 4 3 1 0 1. Not Meet Expectations 2. Somewhat Met Expectations 3. Met Expectations 4. Surpassed Expectations No Answer

When sixteen participants were asked if they had a greater awareness of funding strategies to address the intersection of food sovereignty and climate change in indigenous communities, nine felt that it met their expectations or surpassed their expectations.
1

Question #3: Do you have greater awareness of what IFIP believes in and its core activities? Result:
14 12 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 1. Not Meet Expectations 2. Somewhat Met Expectations 3. Met Expectations 4. Surpassed Expectations No Answer 0 3 1

When sixteen participants were asked if they had a greater awareness of IFIP, fifteen participants felt that it met or surpassed what they expected.

Question #4: Did the Regional Meeting create meaningful opportunities for you to interact with members of IFIP? Result:
10 8 6 4 2 0 1. Not Meet Expectations 2. Somewhat Met Expectations 3. Met Expectations 4. Surpassed Expectations No Answer 0 2 0 5 9

When sixteen participants were asked if the regional meeting created a meaningful opportunity to interact with IFIP members, fourteen stated it met or surpassed what the expected.

Question #5: How satisfied are you with the grantmakers guide? Result:
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1. Not Meet Expectations 2. Somewhat Met Expectations 3. Met Expectations 4. Surpassed Expectations No Answer 0 0 5 4 7

When participants were asked to rate the grantmakers guide twelve out of the sixteen participants felt it met or surpassed them. Comments: Have not read it yet entirely, but I will.

Question #6: How satisfied were you with the following speakers: Evelyn, Jeff, Galina, Alejandro, and Jen? Result:
14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Evelyn Jeff Galina 3. Met Expectations Alejandro Jen 2. Somewhat Met Expectations 4. Surpassed Expectations 5 4 4 5 3 3 12 13 12 12 10

When asked to rate the speakers, everyone scored high with Met expectation or surpassed expectations. They were a little disappointed that Jen wasnt able to give her full presentation.
3

Question #7: The content of the session on the Grantmakers guide was it appropriate and informative? Result:
6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1. Not Meet Expectations 2. Somewhat Met Expectations 3. Met Expectations 4. Surpassed Expectations No Answer 0 2 4 5 5

When asked in regards to the content of the session on the grantmakers guide, ten of the sixteen felt their expectations were met or surpassed for the regional meeting.

Question #8: The content of the session on Climate Change and Food Sovereignty was it appropriate and informative? Result:
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1. Not Meet Expectations 2. Somewhat Met 3. Met Expectations Expectations 4. Surpassed Expectations No Answer 0 0 3 2 9

When asked in regards to the content of the session on the Climate change and Food sovereignty, nine of the sixteen felt their expectations were met or surpassed for the regional meeting

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

Result: Land Tenure How all of this intersects with gender issues How to influence effect of outside forces acting on Indigenous communities, possible funding for unmeet issues outside indigenous communities that directly impact them Continue Agro-ecology Deeper discussion and brainstorming on grant making strategies, overcoming challenges Indigenous women leadership and movement More on strategies Indigenous communities are engaging around climate change, more around strategies to decide who to give grants in Indigenous communities

Question #10: What did you like most about the Regional Meeting?

Result: The food sovereignty of climate change conversations, broad understanding and synthesis of the issues, liked it all The open conversation and idea sharing the specific presentations expertise of the speaker diverse topics Number of folks who attended-great Meeting people Grant making strategy-model and Jeff Campbells talk Networking and new issues Presentations, time to talk to others (wish there was more time for that) Getting to know people and hearing how they do the work (good practice, lessons learned own failures etc) Discussion and networking Hearing amazing personal stories and see the non-funders interested in attending them

Question #11What did you like the least about the Regional Meeting?

Result: Too short There was nothing I didnt like Too brief Shorter presentations seven to eight minutes and fewer speakers three max. Not enough time It was too short, presentations were rushed, 30 minute for lunch was only networking time Broader base of funders

Question #12: Would you attend another Regional Meeting?

Result: Yes Yes but I will not be able to Absolutely Maybe if it were attached to another donor meeting.

Question 13: Would you recommend the IFIP Regional meeting to your colleagues? Result: Yes

Question 14: What funders should IFIP invite to future Regional Meetings? Result: Overlap with IHRFG funders a bit more It would be good if IFIP had an outreach coordinator to approach corporations/business etc New Field Foundation, ISEC, Arabella advisors Funders working on issues that align with but may not be usual suspects like Wallace Global Fund