Mid Term Project Reports of Training by yhk84668

VIEWS: 45 PAGES: 116

More Info
									 December
          MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
 29, 2009




MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT

                   FINAL REPORT



                       Submitted to
                     UNDP Sudan




                             By




                   Abdullah Mansaray
                     TOKTEN Consultant


                       December 2009


                                              0
     December
              MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
     29, 2009

                                 TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                  Content                      Page
1.     Executive Summary                                        3
       1.1 The Review Context                                   3
       1.2 Methodology                                          4
       1.3 Findings and Conclusions                             5
       1.4 Recommendations                                      6

2.     Acknowledgements                                         9

3.     Acronyms                                                 11

4.      Introduction                                            12
        4.1 Background to the Review                            12
        4.2 Origins to TOKTEN and its Establishment in Sudan    12
        4.3 Terms of Reference of the Review                    15

5.      Methodology                                             16
        5.1 Study Design                                        16
        5.2 Sampling Technique                                  16
        5.3 Instrumentation                                     17
        5.4 Data Collection Procedures                          17
        5.5 Data Analysis                                       17
        5.6 Challenges and Limitations                          18

6.      Findings                                                19
        6.1 Preamble                                            19
        6.2 Programme Relevance and Appropriateness             20
        6.3 Programme Efficiency                                26
        6.4 Programme Effectiveness                             35
        6.5 Programme Impact                                    44
        6.6 Sustainability                                      46

7.      Conclusions, Lessons Learnt and Recommendations         48
        7.1 Conclusions                                         48
        7.2 Lessons Learnt                                      49
        7.3 Recommendations                                     50

8.      Documents Reviewed                                      52

        ANNEXES                                                 53
        1. Terms of Reference for TOKTEN Review                 54
        2. TOKTEN Sudan Project Team                            60
        3. Evaluation Issues/ Questions Pursued                 61

                                                                      1
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009

   4. Evaluation instruments                                    65
   5. Review Work Plan                                          78
   6. Schedule of Visits                                        79
   7. List of people Interviewed                                81
   8. Meeting the MDGs in Sudan – Selected Challenges           83
   9. Selection Criteria for TOKTEN Volunteers                  84
   10. How TOKTEN Works                                         87
   11. Conditions of Service for TOKTEN                         89
   12. Profile of TOKTEN Implemented Assignments – 2006-2009    93
   13. TOKTEN Project Evaluation Forms                         104

   About the Consultant                                        114




                                                                     2
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009


1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY


1.1     The Review Context

On 15th November 2009, UNDP Sudan commissioned a Mid-Term Review (MTR) of its
Transfer of Knowledge Through Expatriate Nationals (TOKTEN) Project. The Project, which
started in 2006, is now at the mid-point of its life span, and it is the desire of UNDP Sudan to
assess its effectiveness as a strategy for capacity development in Sudanese institutions.

The inception of TOKTEN in Sudan followed the signing of the Comprehensive Peace
Agreement (CPA) on 9 January 2005. The CPA provided a window of opportunity for peace and
prosperity that would reverse the devastating effects of the long years of war, displacement, and
underdevelopment that had characterised Sudanese society. A major constraint to actualising this
opportunity, however, was that a very large number of the qualified, experienced, and skilled
human resources of the country that could contribute to its recovery and development process
live outside. Empirical evidence exists, nevertheless, that a large pool of these “expatriate
nationals” are willing to return, albeit for short periods, to contribute to the reconstruction and
peace-building initiatives in their home country.

The fact that both the Government of National Unity (GoNU), and the Government of Southern
Sudan have human resources capacity building policies that encourage nationals in the Diaspora
to come home and contribute to the recovery and development efforts provided a favourable
condition for the introduction of TOKTEN. Building on this favourable policy situation and the
increasing political stability in the country, UNDP Sudan launched the TOKTEN initiative in
January 2006, with the initial support of the Netherlands Government and the United Kingdom‟s
Department for International Development (DFID).

The overall objective of TOKTEN Sudan is “to support the national capacity building of
Sudanese institutions in various development sectors, through the transfer of knowledge of the
professional Sudanese in the Diasporas”. Specifically, the Project seeks to:
      Support national capacity building through transfer of knowledge of expatriate Sudanese
         volunteers.
      Reduce the impact of „brain drain‟ by utilizing the services of highly qualified expatriate
         consultants by inviting them to Sudan for short, medium and long duration visits to
         Ministries, educational/research institutions and the private sector.
      Transfer the latest know-how and cutting-edge technology from the developed countries
         to Sudan through Sudanese professionals working in the developed world.
      Pass to the private sector, knowledge on the latest technical methodologies, and business
         and management practices with the assistance of expatriate consultants.
      Contribute to humanitarian, peace and development efforts to rebuild the country
         capitalizing on Sudan‟s own resources and expertise.




                                                                                                 3
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

TOKTEN Volunteers are recruited based on requests from national institutions and
organizations, and assignments are, generally, for short periods of between one to eight weeks.
The „Thematic Areas‟ identified for support are:
     Governance and Rule of Law
     Gender in Development
     Poverty Eradication
     Human Resources Development
     Sustainable Natural Resource and Environmental Conservation and Management
     Rural Development
     Business and Sustainable Livelihood Development
     Agriculture, Food Security, and Rural Development
     Health
     Education, Training and Research
Institutions and Organizations initially targeted for support are Government institutions at all
levels, vocational institutes, universities, research institutes, and private sector organizations.

Having reached its mid life-span, UNDP Sudan has commissioned this MTR to determine,
among other things, how effective it has been so far as an approach to capacity development in
Sudanese institutions. The Terms of Reference (ToR) of the review require the Consultant to:
    Assess progress made by the Project towards achieving set results
    Determine whether or not useful knowledge has been transferred to Sudanese institutions
    Determine whether the knowledge has been appropriately used
    Gauge the impact resulting from the use of the knowledge in the benefiting institutions
    Examine the quality and relevance of the staff selected for the knowledge transfer; and
    Draw up and document any lessons learnt from this experience including identifying
      factors that might have prevented the project from reaching the desired objectives

1.2     Methodology

A highly participatory approach, that involved the UNDP Sudan TOKTEN Team, the benefiting
institutions and organizations, and other stakeholders in Khartoum, Juba, and Kassala, was adopted in
carrying out the review. First, an extensive desk review was done and consultations held with the
TOKTEN Team from 26th November to 5th December 2009, during which the review process was refined,
instruments developed, and an Inception Report prepared and submitted.

Field visits to the benefiting institutions and organizations were then undertaken as follows:
     Khartoum             -        6th to 8th and 17th December
     Juba                 -        9th to 12th December
     Kassala              -        13th to 16th December
Primary data was collected mainly through in-depth interviews, focus group discussions, and
consultative meetings with the stakeholders. Data was collected from 14 Host Institutions and the
TOKTEN Volunteers assigned to them. This constitutes about 33% of all assignments made to
date. It is important to note here that all the TOKTEN Volunteers had finished their assignments
at the time of this review. This imposed a constraint to the process of obtaining their face-to-face
views on the project. However, it was possible to have a face-to-face interview with one of them

                                                                                                   4
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

who had returned home to take up appointment with Government. Recourse had to be taken to
obtaining information from the rest by telephone and e-mail.

Secondary data was collected largely from UNDP documents (project reports, quarterly and
annual reports, evaluation reports, etc.), as well as reports from the Volunteers and Host
Institutions themselves, among others (e.g. anecdotal evidence from newspaper articles).

1.3      Findings and Conclusions

A summary of the findings and conclusions are presented below:

     TOKTEN is, indeed, found to be very relevant to the human capacity development needs of
      Sudan, and is compatible with government policies in this respect, as well as UNDP‟s
      strategic framework of support to the country.

     The project provides a very cost-effective and efficient option for transferring valuable
      knowledge and skills to Sudanese institutions through expatriate nationals in the Diaspora.

     TOKTEN Volunteers recruited are highly qualified professionals with appreciable
      experience in their respective fields.

     Valuable knowledge and skills have been transferred in a number of cases, and these are
      being used and are already impacting positively on some beneficiary institutions. There are a
      few cases where the project has not succeeded in doing this.

     The amount of knowledge transferred (and ultimately used) is a function of the duration of
      training, capacity of the trainees themselves, quality of supportive facilities, opportunity to
      practise while training, and the complexity of the knowledge and skills involved, among
      other things.

     The project is still to establish strong links with relevant organisations in the Diaspora that
      could enlarge its pool of volunteers.

     The ToR for Volunteers have not always been detailed enough as to specify precisely what
      activities the Volunteer should engage in during the assignment.

     The project has fallen short of the number TOKTEN Volunteers to be recruited. With a target
      of 200, only 43 have been recruited so far.

     The number of personnel who have benefitted so far from TOKTEN assignments across the
      thematic Areas has far exceeded the 1000 initially targeted for training.

     Only half the number of states proposed to be covered by the project has so far been covered;
      and there have been a disproportionate number of assignments to Khartoum relative to the
      other areas.

                                                                                                   5
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

     Some of the TOKTEN assignments, especially those that involve a great deal of practical
      exercises, would require more time than others.

     Some Host Institutions have not always met their obligation to provide an environment that
      could facilitate and maximise the transfer of knowledge.

     The project has suffered from an unstable management structure at least at the Area
      Coordination level. There has been a rapid turnover of staff, and the full complement of staff
      has not been achieved as at the time of this review. Moreover, programme support from
      UNDP regional offices in the other states does not appear reassuring so far.

     The Database and Advocacy mechanism of the project has much to achieve both within and
      outside the country. Much greater advocacy still has to be done, perhaps starting with UNDP
      itself.

     TOKTEN partnership links with government appears weak at the moment, and seems to be
      limited to getting government and related institutions to commit themselves only to providing
      “conducive environments” for training to take place. Representatives of both GNU and GoSS
      on the Project Executive Board expressed some dissatisfaction with the extent to which they
      have been involved in project decision making.

     The M&E mechanism does not provide enough scope for a more active participation of
      stakeholders, especially in determining project impact. It is demonstrates some weakness in
      this particular area.

1.4      Recommendations

The following are the recommendations as they relate to the aspects evaluated:

Project management

1. UNDP support for TOKTEN should be strengthened. In particular, the full complement of
   project staff should be recruited, and the necessary resources made available. Mainstreaming
   TOKTEN and establishing greater synergy with other UN programmes sharing similar goals
   is an attractive option. This should provide an effective exit strategy for the project.

2. The tools for project cycle management should be reviewed with a view to facilitating the
   smooth running of the project and for improved institutional learning. This is particularly
   important because of the high turnover of staff at the implementation level. There should be a
   clear link between the project document, the assessment tools, various administrative tools,
   the activity plans (especially the ToR for Volunteers, and the tools for monitoring and
   evaluation).

3. The project team should play a more active role in all aspects of Host Institutions‟ TOKTEN
   activities (e.g. needs assessment, selection of personnel for training, monitoring of activities

                                                                                                  6
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

   during the assignment, and evaluation of outcomes). This should help to assure that the
   greatest benefit is derived from such assignments.

4. Related to the above, the TOKTEN team should assure that the requisite facilities to support
   assignments exist in Host Institutions; and that the relevant personnel are selected for
   training.

5. TOKTEN assignment to thematic areas and locations should be prioritised. While
   recognising the demand-driven nature of the project, prioritising themes and locations, and
   perhaps sharing these with Volunteers may introduce the element of „supply drive‟ to
   complement the „demand drive‟ nature of the project. Prioritisation should be contextual, and
   based on the evolving political, economic, and socio-cultural realities of the country.

6. Special terms for some longer assignments (3-6 months), depending on the nature of
   activities to be undertaken, should be contrived, while taking care not to create „employment-
   like‟ conditions for the Volunteers. Such term should be made attractive enough for some
   Volunteers to seek longer leave (e.g. sabbatical) from their employers where possible.

Information and Advocacy

7. Advocacy for the project should be stepped up locally and internationally. In particular, the
   distribution of promotional materials locally, and overseas to strategically important
   organisations, should be enhanced substantially. This should serve to expand the database of
   volunteers. Moreover, links with other relevant Sudanese organisations in the Diaspora (e.g.
   Secretariat of Sudanese Working Abroad) should be established.

8. The upgrading of the TOKTEN website should be expedited, and more advocacy materials
   developed and published in it.

9. Advocacy visits to the regions should be better planned, and should involve all relevant
   stakeholders. The Consultative Forum in each project location prescribed in the project
   document should be actualised. This should not be confused with the routine advocacy visits.

10. Advocacy letters and materials should be sent to all government ministries, universities and
    other institutions of higher learning, NGOs, the private sector, and other relevant national
    entities.

11. Official duty tours abroad for direct contact and discussions with potential partners,
    embassies, and members of the Diaspora should be made.

7.3.3 Monitoring and Evaluation

12. The M&E mechanism of the project should be revised to provide more precise information
    on project performance. In particular, the use of performance assessment workshops
    following the completion of assignments should be instituted. This mechanism should


                                                                                               7
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

   emphasise the active role of beneficiaries and other stakeholders (see recommendation on
   Consultative Forum above).

13. As the project draws to a close, data collection and management should be further
    strengthened. All previous data and those to be collected should be properly organised and
    made accessible at all times.

Partnerships

14. Greater commitment to TOKTEN by key partners should be sought. Clear input for
    government and beneficiary institutions should be defined (e.g. budgeting for TOKTEN
    support; and appointing a National TOKTEN Project Coordinator to be based in the most
    appropriate Ministry and to work closely with the Project Team). Moreover, the more active
    participation of the Ministry of International Cooperation (GNU) and the Ministry of
    Regional Cooperation (GoSS) in project decision making should canvassed.

15. Partnership links with the private sector should be strengthened. Key private sector
    organisations should benefit from TOKTEN assignments, and be convinced to contribute to
    TOKTEN costs.




                                                                                            8
    December
             MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
    29, 2009

2. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


The Consultant would like to thank, first, UNDP Sudan for affording him the opportunity of
being part of its development activities in the country by giving him this assignment. Several
staff at the Country Office went to great length not only to facilitate my trip to Sudan, but to also
ensure that my stay was comfortable. Special mention must be made of Mariam Boulis, Mona
Ibrahim, Pamela Odudoh, and Fadwa Zaki. To these I owe a great debt of gratitude. The
TOKTEN Project Team was an excellent one to work with. John Ajawin, Mohamed Elsayed Ali,
Howida Elrasheed, and Elnour Elkhalifa demonstrated such an exceptional level of efficiency.
Without them this assignment would have been most tedious. Many thanks also to Ganiyu Ipaye
of the UNDP Regional office in Juba, and Elnazir Mohieldeen, former TOKTEN Operations
Assistant, for coming in to help at a crucial time, and for sharing with me their rich experience
with the project.

I am grateful to the TOKTEN Volunteers, personnel of the Host Institutions, Government
officials, and the many other stakeholders in all the locations visited for spending valuable time
to share their experiences with us, and to get us to understand how the project has been
performing.

Finally, I thank Francis Ufo, the project driver, for being so careful over the long distances we
travelled.

The Consultant takes full responsibility for the views expressed in this report.




                                                                                                   9
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009


Fig. 1: Map of Sudan (Source: GraphicMaps.com)




                                                 10
  December
           MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
  29, 2009

3. ACRONYMS


CCA                -    Common Country Assessment
COMESA             -    Common Market of Eastern and Southern Africa
CPA                -    Comprehensive Peace Agreement
CPAP               -    Country Programme Action Plan
DFID               -    UK Department for International Development
GAFTA              -    General Arab Free Trade Agreement
GNU                -    Government of National Unity (Sudan)
GoSS               -    Government of Southern Sudan
GOV&RoL            -    Governance and Rule of Law
IDP                -    Internal Displaced Person
JAM                -    Joint Assessment Mission
JNTT               -    Joint National Transition Team
M&E                -    Monitoring and Evaluation
MDGs               -    Millennium Development Goals
MDTF               -    Multi Trust Fund
MEAs               -    Multilateral Environment Agreements
MTR                -    Mid-Term Review
MSU                -    Monitoring and Supervision Unit
NGO                -    Non-Governmental Organization
PA                 -    Preparatory Assistance
PES                -    Poverty Eradication Strategy
PRSP               -    Poverty Eradication Strategy Paper
PSA                -    Power Sharing Agreement
SPLM/A             -    Sudan People Liberation Movement/Army
TOKTEN             -    Transfer of Knowledge Through Expatriate Nationals
TRMA               -    UNDP Threats and Risk Mapping Analysis
UNAMID             -    United Nations-Africa Union Mission in Darfur
UNMIS              -    United Nations Mission in Sudan
UNCT               -    United Nations Country Team
UNDAF              -    United Nations Development Assistance Framework
UNDP               -    United Nations Development Programme
UNEG               -    United Nations Evaluation Group




                                                                             11
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

4. INTRODUCTION


4.1     Background to the Review

UNDP Sudan has signed a contract with the Consultant to carry out a Mid-Term Review of its
Transfer of Knowledge Through Expatriate Nationals (TOKTEN) Project. The Project, which
started in 2006, is now at the mid-point of its life span, and it is the desire of UNDP Sudan to
assess its effectiveness as a strategy for capacity development in Sudanese institutions.

The contract was signed on the 15th and 16th November, 2009, by UNDP and the Consultant
respectively. The duration of the assignment was from 22nd November 2009 to 29th December
2009. Due to problems with flight connections, the Consultant arrived Khartoum on 25th
November 2009, and started work effectively on 26th November 2009. It is pertinent to note that
the Consultant‟s arrival coincided with a rather long break that lasted from 27th November to 30th
November due to the weekend, and the national holiday for the feast of Eid El-Adha. Work
resumed on 1st December 2009.

According to the Terms of Reference (ToR) of the Review (see Annex 1), one of the deliverables
of the review is an Inception Report detailing the Consultant‟s understanding of “what is being
evaluated and why, showing how each evaluation question will be answered by way of:
     Proposed methods
     Proposed sources of data
     Data collection procedures”
The Inception Report was submitted on 1st December 2009.

A the end of the data collection and analysis process, the Consultant is required to produce a
Draft Evaluation Report to be reviewed by the Programme Unit and key stakeholders. The
consolidated comments from this review are to be incorporated in the Final Evaluation Report
that should serve as the last deliverable of this review

This document constitutes the Final Evaluation Report. The review was carried out in
collaboration with the UNDP Sudan TOKTEN Project Team (see Annex 2).

4.2     Origins of TOKTEN and its Establishment in Sudan

TOKTEN was established in 1977 by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) as a
mechanism to mitigate the adverse effect of the “Brain Drain” or “reverse transfer of
technology” phenomenon that is plaguing many developing countries, especially in Africa. This
is a phenomenon whereby highly qualified and experienced professionals from poor (usually
war-stricken) countries emigrate to richer and more stable countries (predominantly in the West)
to seek better job opportunities. Many of them become nationals of these countries, and never
return to their home countries.




                                                                                               12
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

TOKTEN was conceived as a “window of opportunity for expatriate nationals with lengthy
experience in their fields of expertise to return to their home countries, for an agreed period of
time” to share their knowledge, skills, and experience with their home-based compatriots. The
unique advantage of TOKTEN, as conceived by UNDP, is that Volunteers can “merge their
acquired learning with their familiarity of local culture and language in order to effectively
transfer their knowledge and skills”, thus making it a potentially effective and efficient
development intervention.

Since its inception, TOKTEN has been expanded to more than 30 countries that include India,
Pakistan, China, the Philippines, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Vietnam, Lebanon, Syria, and Nigeria.
According to UNDP, the driving spirit of TOKTEN is that of volunteerism, “which embodies a
number of values such as free will, commitment, engagement and solidarity”. For the individual
volunteer, such assignments are expected to bring social benefits “through trust building and
reciprocity among citizens”, particularly important for those coming from countries torn by
internal strife.

The inception of TOKTEN in Sudan followed the signing of the Comprehensive Peace
Agreement (CPA) on 9 January 2005. The CPA provided a window of opportunity for peace and
prosperity that would reverse the devastating effects of the long years of war, displacement, and
underdevelopment that had characterised Sudanese society. Achieving this would depend on
“capitalizing the vast natural resource endowment and significant human capital of the country”.
The reality, however, was that a very large number of the qualified, experienced, and skilled
human resources of the country that could contribute to its recovery and development process
live outside. Nevertheless, studies conducted by different agencies on expatriate Sudanese
nationals in the Diaspora have indicated that “a large number of highly talented and experienced
expatriate nationals are willing to contribute to the reconstruction and peace-building initiatives
in their home country”.1

A favourable condition for the introduction of TOKTEN existed in the fact that both the
Government of National Unity (GoNU) and the Government of Southern Sudan have human
resources capacity building policies that encourage nationals in the Diaspora to come home and
contribute to the recovery and development efforts. Building on this favourable policy situation
and the increasing political stability in the country, UNDP launched the TOKTEN initiative in
January 2006, with the initial support of the Netherlands Government and the United Kingdom‟s
Department for International Development (DFID).

TOKTEN Sudan has as its overall objective “to support the national capacity building of
Sudanese institutions in various development sectors, through the transfer of knowledge of the
professional Sudanese in the Diasporas”. The specific objectives of the Project are:
      To support national capacity building through transfer of knowledge of expatriate
         Sudanese volunteers.
      To reduce the impact of „brain drain‟ by utilizing the services of highly qualified
         expatriate consultants by inviting them to Sudan for short, medium and long duration
         visits to Ministries, educational/research institutions and the private sector.
1
    UNDP TOKTEN Sudan Overview

                                                                                                13
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

        To transfer the latest know-how and cutting-edge technology from the developed
          countries to Sudan through Sudanese professionals working in the developed world.
        To pass to the private sector, knowledge on the latest technical methodologies, and
          business and management practices with the assistance of expatriate consultants.
        To contribute to humanitarian, peace and development efforts to rebuild the country
          capitalizing on Sudan‟s own resources and expertise.

The recruitment of TOKTEN Volunteers is demand-driven, and predicated on overt requests by
Sudan national institutions and organizations Assignments are to be for short periods (one to
eight weeks in various development areas), although some flexibility is allowed for extensions
for up to three months, based on mutual agreement between the TOKTEN Volunteer and the
TOKTEN Project management.

The following Priority (or Thematic) Areas have been identified to guide recruitment:
    Governance and Rule of Law
    Gender in Development
    Poverty Eradication
    Human Resources Development
    Sustainable Natural Resource and Environmental Conservation and Management
    Rural Development
    Business and Sustainable Livelihood Development
    Agriculture, Food Security, and Rural Development
    Health
    Education, Training and Research

The institutions that were initially targeted to benefit from the Project were the following:
    Government institutions at all levels
    Vocational institutes
    Universities
    Research institutes
    Private sector organisations

An Assessment of the Preparatory Assistance (PA) Phase Implementation Process was carried
out in November 2006, to precede a full-fledge phase of TOKTEN that will run for three years,
“subject to extension”, from 2007-2010. According to the Project Document, the Project is to
cover 10 States of Sudan, and about 200 TOKTEN Volunteers are to be recruited “as per the
requests of eligible national institutions across Sudan”. In both Northern and Southern Sudan,
“more than 1000 personnel are expected to benefit directly from the capacity building support of
the project”.2

The Project has now reached its mid life-span, and this review has been commissioned to
determine, among other things, how effective it has been so far as an approach to capacity
development in Sudanese institutions. A critical focus of this review is to enable UNDP and all
2
    UNDP TOKTEN Sudan Project Document

                                                                                                14
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

stakeholders to reflect and learn from the implementation of the Project so far, and what
modifications, if any, that could be made to achieve its stated objectives.

4.3     Terms of Reference of the Review

The Consultant was provided with detailed Terms of Reference that gave a background to
TOKTEN Sudan, a description of responsibilities, the competencies and qualifications required
of the Evaluator, and the evaluation ethics and management arrangements, among other things
(see Annex 1).

The purposes of the review were “to take a close look at how the project has evolved and the
contribution it has been making to the overall capacity development in the benefiting
institutions”. More precisely, the Consultant was to assess the effectiveness of TOKTEN as an
approach to capacity development in Sudanese institutions.

The specific tasks of the review were to:
    Assess progress made by the Project towards achieving set results
    Determine whether or not useful knowledge has been transferred to Sudanese institutions
    Determine whether the knowledge has been appropriately used
    Gauge the impact resulting from the use of the knowledge in the benefiting institutions
    Examine the quality and relevance of the staff selected for the knowledge transfer; and
    Draw up and document any lessons learnt from this experience including identifying
       factors that might have prevented the project from reaching the desired objectives

While the Consultant was expected to derive and elaborate salient questions from the stated
purposes and objectives of the review, the ToR nevertheless specified the following “key” ones:
    Was there knowledge transfer?
    Was it useful and indeed put to use?
    What impact did it make on the institution in the thematic area covered?
    What improvements could be made on the different processes?
    What are the issues and challenges facing the project and what are the possible solutions?

A highly participatory approach was recommended for the review to include UNDP project staff,
TOKTEN Volunteers, Host Institutions and organizations, Government line Ministries, civil
society, and other relevant stakeholders. Data collection techniques were to include desk
reviews, client surveys, in-depth interviews, focus group discussions, stakeholders meetings and
consultations, and selected site visits, particularly to Khartoum, Juba, and Kassala.




                                                                                             15
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

5. METHODOLOGY


5.1     Study Design

An evaluation of this nature is essentially an ex post facto study, as the Evaluator was studying
an intervention of which he was not part of contriving. While this may make for a considerable
degree of objectivity, it is also fraught with the danger of misunderstanding or not fully
appreciating underlining motives, perceptions, and motivations, among other things. A way out
of this danger is to adopt a participatory approach that involves, as much as possible, all major
stakeholders, as the ToR has indeed suggested. This in no way impinges on the Evaluator‟s
prerogative to make judgement. Rather, this judgement will be made from a more informed and
objective platform.

While the evaluation adopted the generic survey research design, the emphasis, however, was on
those participatory techniques that included focus group discussions, in-depth interviews, as well
as structured observations. Extensive review of relevant documents was also undertaken both
before and during the review process.

5.2     Sampling Technique

A combination of multi-stage and judgemental sampling techniques was used to select the
TOKTEN Volunteers, host institutions, Government Ministries, and other relevant stakeholders
involved in the review. First, the three major locations where volunteers are predominantly
assigned – Khartoum, Juba, and Kassala – were automatically selected as the sample locations.
Other areas that were visited depended on the advice of the TOKTEN Project Team and the
availability of time and logistics.

Benefiting institutions and organizations were stratified according to thematic area, and a sample
„proportionate to size‟ of the category was selected from each. Thus, for a thematic area with
more „benefiting‟ institutions, a larger sample was selected. This was to assure that the sample
was representative of all thematic areas of TOKTEK support. A total of 14 institutions that had
benefited from TOKTEN assignments were finally selected using this sampling frame. In these
institutions, all the key contact persons, and as many of the staff trained that were available
during the field visits, were interviewed (see Annex 7 for the list of people interviewed). In
addition to the institutions that had benefited from TOKTEN support, a judgemental sample
(based on perceived capacity development needs) of other institutions that had not yet received
support were visited with the intention of obtaining an insight into the extent of advocacy for the
project. A total of 5 such institutions were visited.

The TOKTEN Volunteers that were included in the survey were those who were assigned to the
selected „benefiting‟ institutions. As at the time of the field visits, all but two of the Volunteers
had returned to their countries of residence. These were contacted by telephone, and the
questionnaire sent to them by e-mail for completion. Of the two Volunteers that were still in the
country, one was interviewed as the other was on leave and not available during the field visit.


                                                                                                  16
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

5.3     Instrumentation

The first step adopted in developing the relevant instruments for the review was to draw up a
Design Matrix that detailed out how each task/study objective was to be measured. The matrix
contained a list of evaluation questions and issues to be pursued during the data collection
process (see Annex 3). This was shared with the Project Team, and very valuable contributions
were made. The list indicates, for each question, the type of data to be collected, and the possible
sources of the data. It provided the essential framework for structuring the different
questionnaires, interview schedules and focus group guides appropriate to the sources of data. A
template for summarising data on TOKTEN assignments from 2006 to 2009 was also designed
(see Annex 4 for instruments).

The completed Application Forms for TOKTEN Volunteers, TOKTEN Assignment Final Report
Forms, Evaluation by TOKTEN Volunteers Forms, and the Evaluation by Host Institution Forms
also constituted important sources of secondary data.

5.4     Data Collection Procedures

As suggested in the ToR, and proposed in the section on Study Design, a combination of
qualitative and quantitative techniques was used in carrying out the review. First, an extensive
review of documents was undertaken, and this continued even as the data collection proceeded.
Preliminary consultations were also held with the Project Team to plan out strategies.

Primary data was collected mainly through in-depth interviews, focus group discussions, and
consultative meetings with the stakeholders identified above during site visits to institutions in
Khartoum, Juba, and Kassala where Volunteers were assigned (see Annex 5 for Work Plan and
Annex 6 for Schedule of Visits).

Secondary data was collected largely from UNDP documents (project reports, quarterly and
annual reports, evaluation reports, etc.), as well as reports from the Volunteers and Host
Institutions themselves. Anecdotal information from the news and print media was also found
useful.

Opportunities were created for the triangulation of data with UNDP, and other stakeholders
before the report of the review was finalised and submitted. Annex 5 shows the detailed Work
Plan of the review process.

5.5     Data Analysis

Much of the data for this review was qualitative, as indicated above, and mainly collected
through in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. Analysis of such data consisted in
capturing the similarities and differences in views and opinions, and probing into possible
underlying motives and reasons for these. This involved a predominantly descriptive process.
Simple descriptive statistics (frequency counts, percentages, and appropriate graphs and charts)
were used for the quantitative data, and those aspects of the qualitative data that lend themselves
to quantification.
                                                                                                 17
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

5.6     Challenges and Limitations

The following challenges were faced during the review process:

1. While the contract was signed on the 15th and 16th November, 2009, by UNDP and the
   Consultant respectively, for the duration 22nd November to 29th December 2009, the
   Consultant arrived Khartoum only on 25th November 2009, due to problems with flight
   connections. His arrival coincided with a rather long break that lasted from 27th November to
   30th November due to the weekend, and the national holiday for the feast of Eid El-Adha.
   While this period was utilised to review relevant documents and to write the Inception
   Report, it nevertheless impinged on the schedule for the field visits and interviews.

2. The review was carried out at a time when all the TOKTEN Volunteers had completed their
   assignments and returned to their countries of residence. Communication with them had to be
   done by telephone and e-mail, with its attendant constraint on both time and depth of
   discussion. Only one former Volunteer who had taken up appointment with Government was
   interviewed.

3. As a result of the turnover of project staff, some problems were encountered with accessing
   certain data.

4. Determining project impact was particularly challenging as no impact assessment data was
   available, and the constraints of time and logistics did not permit such to be „scientifically‟
   collected. The Consultant had to resort to anecdotal evidence.

5. The review was done at the end of the year when most institutions and organisations were
   preoccupied with their end-of-year reports and other activities. This imposed some
   constraints on the data collection process.




                                                                                               18
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

6. FINDINGS


6.1      Preamble

The wide range of issues and questions to be addressed in this review required that these be
organised in certain categories that would allow for consistency of approach and in-depth
analysis. The following categories have therefore been contrived in analysing the data, and in
presenting the findings:

     1. Programme relevance and appropriateness: This category addresses the twin issues of
        how relevant and appropriate the project has been at three levels: policy, strategy, and
        programme levels.
   i. Relevance at the policy level: This is assessed in terms of how meaningful the project
        continues to be within the context of the prevailing situation in which it was contrived.
        Questions addressed here include: “Is TOKTEN still relevant to the prevailing situation
        in Sudan?”; “Are there Government policies for human resources capacity building to
        which TOKTEN still relates either directly or indirectly?”; “In what ways, if any, can
        TOKTEN contribute to Sudan‟s achievement of the MDGs, and which ones?”
  ii. Relevance at the strategy level: This category addresses the extent to which the design
        and implementation of TOKTEN are within the mandate of UNDP Sudan, and how the
        project ties up with UNDP‟s framework of strategic support to the country, as contained
        in the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF).
 iii. Relevance at the programme level: Analysis of the institutional framework and
        organisation of the project is dealt with in this category. Among the questions addressed
        here are: “Is TOKTEN relevant and appropriate to the support needs of the Host
        Institutions?”; “How are these needs identified?”; “Do these institutions in fact have
        capacity development plans to which TOKTEN fits?”; “Are the Terms of Reference of
        TOKTEN Volunteers actually designed to address these needs?”

      2. Programme efficiency: Issues in this category are those that relate to the extent to which
      the project has used the least possible resources to achieve the required quality of
      outputs/outcomes. Questions addressed here are: “Does TOKTEN provide a more cost-
      effective means of capacity building than other options?”; “Are the right candidates from the
      pool of available experts in the required thematic areas actually selected for TOKTEN
      assignments?”; “What is the pattern of assignments to the thematic areas? Are they all
      appropriately sampled? If not, why?”; “Does the duration of the TOKTEN assignments make
      for meaningful knowledge and skills transfer?”; “Is the working environment of the
      Volunteers such as to facilitate efficiency in knowledge and skills transfer?”

      3. Programme effectiveness: This category comprises issues/questions that relate to the
      extent to which the project has achieved its set objectives. These include “What progress has
      the project made towards achieving set results?”; “Has useful knowledge and skills indeed
      been transferred to Sudanese institutions?”; “Are these knowledge and skills relevant to the
      needs of the selected benefiting staff? Are they of high quality? Are they put to use?”; “Are


                                                                                                19
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

   the Terms of Reference and the pre-assignment transfer plans of the Volunteers actually
   implemented?” “Who monitors this, and how?”

   4. Programme impact: Questions in this category are designed to determine the extent to
   which the knowledge and skills gained have been put to use in the benefiting institutions, and
   the impact resulting from their use. These include such questions as: “Have you been using
   the knowledge and skills gained in your work?”; “Has the quality of your work improved as a
   result of the knowledge and skills gained?”; “Have you been able to pass on these knowledge
   and skills to your colleagues at work? If so, have you noticed an improvement in their
   outputs?”; “What impact do you think the new knowledge and skills gained have made to
   your institutions as a whole?” “Is your use of the knowledge and skills monitored in any
   way?”; “If so, who monitors it, and how do you get a feedback from this monitoring that
   helps you improve on your practice?”

   5. Sustainability: Assessment in this category deals with the extent to which the gains of
   TOKTEN are institutionally sustainable, and the prospects of continuation after donor
   support might have ended. Of concern here also is to identify the improvements that could be
   made to the different processes of the project to make it more efficient and effective, and
   thereby enhance the sustainability of its gains.

It should be mentioned here that these categories are not mutually exclusive as, indeed, there
may be some degree of overlap among the issues and questions themselves. What has been
attempted here is a „categorisation of convenience‟ that allows the review team to ensure that all
the relevant questions in the ToR are appropriately addressed. Perhaps a few other issues outside
the ToR may have also been included. This has been done to give greater context and texture to
the review process.

6.2 Programme Relevance and Appropriateness

6.2.1 At Policy Level

The first issues addressed here is how relevant TOKTEN continues to be within the prevailing
situation in which it was contrived. The Consultant observes, first and foremost, that TOKTEN
feeds very well into the Joint Assessment Mission Report (JAM), which is widely considered the
road map to Sudan‟s recovery and development. The Report notes, among many other things,
that the country possesses vast natural resources and a significant human resource base that
present enormous potential for development. The key constraint to achieving this, however, is
that of a weak institutional capacity.

    “Key constraints will be institutional – especially as related to capacity – and the need
    to quickly build trust at local and national levels”.

    “Rapidly building local capacity to enable consolidation of the peace is key, which
    means that resources are needed to spearhead development efforts and improve public
    sector performance as agents of development of transforming the fledgling
    administration into a fully functional government capable of managing substantial
    resources”. Joint Assessment Report – Sudan Mission, March, 2005 (Vol. 1, p. 14)
                                                                                                20
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

Designed as a project to “support national capacity building of Sudanese institutions in various
development sectors through the transfer of knowledge of professional Sudanese in the
Diaspora”3, TOKTEN is overtly relevant to the needs of the country.

Second, it is observed that both the Government of National Unity and the Government of
Southern Sudan have human capacity development policies that are mainstreamed into those of
all government institutions. These policies are designed, by and large, to enable the country meet
the challenges of reaching the MDGs (see Annex 8 for the challenges to meeting the MDGs in
Sudan as identified in the JAM Report). A central focus of these policies is the development of
the human resources of institutions, which is considered key to overall institutional capacity
building. Available project documents indicate that TOKTEN is, in design and implementation,
something of a trajectory for supporting the national development goals in Sudan. In principle it
adopts a demand-driven approach in the sense that the requests received by the project are
extracted from the plans of Government Ministries and institutions at the national and state levels

      The Consultant concludes, therefore, that TOKTEN is still very relevant to the
      prevailing capacity development needs of Sudan, and especially in assisting the country
      address the challenges of meeting MDGs 1-8 as identified in the JAM Report. It is
      significant to note that the “thematic areas” that guide the recruitment of TOKTEN
      Volunteers are all found to relate to these MDGs, and so serve to define both the
      relevance and appropriateness of the project at the policy level.

6.2.2 At Strategy level

UNDP-Sudan‟s support to the country is done within the United Nations Development
Assistance Framework (UNDAF).

      “The UNDAF is the strategic programme framework for the UNCT. It describes the
      collective response of the UNCT to the priorities in the national development framework -
      priorities that may have been influenced by the UNCT’s analytical contribution. Its high
      level expected results are called UNDAF outcomes. These show where the UNCT can
      bring its unique comparative advantages to bear in advocacy, capacity development,
      policy advice and programming for the achievement of MD/MDG related national
      priorities”. UNDAF Policy and Guidelines (http//www.undp.org).


Recent modifications to the UNDAF emphasise the follow steps for UN Country Teams
(UNCTs) to follow in “developing a coherent approach at country level that is relevant and
responsive to country needs....”
 A greater emphasis on national ownership, and the identification of the added value that a
    coherent UNCT response can bring to national development;
 Greater flexibility to tailor analysis to country needs, making the CCA one of several
    options for strengthening country analysis;


3
    UNDP Sudan TOKTEN Project Document

                                                                                                  21
    December
             MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
    29, 2009

   Clarity on the human rights based approach, gender equality, environmental
    sustainability and capacity development throughout the guidelines;
   Reflection of the Secretary-General Decision No. 2008/26 on South-South Cooperation;
   Greater clarity and resources for the use of results-based management;
   More information and resources on conflict prevention and disaster risk reduction;
   Better balance between social, human, environmental and economic development issues and
    objectives;
   Clarity about the accountabilities of key actors in the process, particularly the Resident
    Coordinator and the individuals leading the UNCT, and measures to promote harmonisation
    among UNCT members;
   A more inclusive approach to ensure the full engagement of specialized and non-resident
    agencies as well as relevant national partners in line with national priorities;
   More guidance on how to determine the UN’s comparative advantage and shape strategic
    prioritization with linkages to regional and global commitments and development
    priorities.

The assessment of the relevance of TOKTEN at the strategy level is done within the framework
of these guidelines, and the UNDP Sudan Country Programme Action Plan – 31 March 2009,
which is based on the UNDAF. First, we note that the project is designed to be demand-driven,
as indicated above; recruitment of Sudanese professionals in the Diaspora is predicated on the
identified needs (and requests) of national institutions. The Volunteers serve their assignments
in these institutions, and at the end are assessed by them (see organisation at the programme
level below). To the mind of the Consultant, this should make for “national ownership” of the
project through addressing the specific “capacity development” needs of institutions. The extent
to which this is being realised at the programme level will be dealt with in a subsequent section
of the findings. The fact also that it is Sudanese nationals abroad who are recruited as TOKTEN
Volunteers is adjudged to be in compliance with the Secretary-General‟s decision on South-
South Cooperation.

With reference to the guideline for “greater clarity and resources for the use of results-based
management”, the Consultant notes that, generally, the project is implemented in a way that
should ensure that all of its processes, products and services contribute to the achievement of
desired results (as jointly identified by Host Institutions, TOKTEN Volunteers, and the UNDP
Project Team). It depends on clearly defined accountability for results, and requires systematic
monitoring, self-assessment and reporting on progress. This is done largely by the Host
Institutions, Volunteers themselves, and the benefiting personnel. This will be elaborated in the
section on programme effectiveness below.

    The Consultant is of the opinion, based on available evidence, that the TOKTEN
    project is relevant at the strategy level.




                                                                                               22
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

6.2.3 At Programme Level

1. Institutional Framework and Organisation: The relevance of TOKTEN at the programme
level is determined, first, by analysing the institutional framework and organisation of the
project. Below is the organisational chart of TOKTEN-Sudan. After the PA phase of the project,
a decision was taken to continue with the UNDP Execution Modality of implementation.

   Fig. 2: Organisational Chart of TOKTEN Project

                                Project Executive Board


Project Assurance                                                         Project Support

                                                                      National TOKTEN
                                  Project Manager                      Database and
                             TOKTEN Project Manager                    Advocacy Assistant
                                                                      Operations Assistant



       Project Team, Juba                             Project Team, Khartoum
 Area Project Coordinator                       Area Project Coordinator
 Project Assistant                              Project Assistant
 Project Driver                                 Project Driver

       KEYS
               -      Depicts two-way formal communications
               -      Depicts two-way informal communications
   (Source: UNDP Sudan TOKTEN Project Document)

This modality makes extensive use of partners in programme management arrangements.
Records show that a range of partners, at federal and regional levels, that include Government
Line Ministries and other governmental institutions, the private sector, CSOs, and universities,
have variously been involved as partners. The partnership mechanism that exists between
TOKTEN and these institutions is built on the conditions that the TOKTEN Project deploys the
expert Volunteers and covers their travel entitlements and provides a modest living expense;
while the Host Institutions, on their part, are committed to facilitating the training environment
for the assignment to be implemented smoothly and efficiently as scheduled.

In terms of the management and coordination for each assignment, the project ensures that the
beneficiary institution retains responsibility for organization and administration of the TOKTEN
assignment, while the expert is “co-located” in each institution. A five-member Project

                                                                                               23
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

Executive Board provides overall guidance on project management and “ensures the quality of
project outputs and contribution of the project outputs to the relevant UNDP Country Office
outcomes”4. Of the five members of this Board, two are the so-called “Senior TOKTEN Users” –
the Ministry of International Cooperation of the Government of National Unity in Khartoum, and
the Ministry of Regional Cooperation of the Government of Southern Sudan in Juba.

As the chart above depicts (and as stated in the project document), an area-based project
management approach is adopted in the spatial distribution of project personnel “to provide
effective service delivery in at least 10 states in Northern and Southern Sudan as intended in the
project targets”.

      The following observations regarding the management structure are appropriate at
      this point:
       The structure seems, in principle, appropriate both to UNDP‟s project management
          approach and to the political and regional complexities of Sudan itself. However,
          evidence from the field seems to suggest that there has not been the same degree of
          satisfaction by all members, especially the government representatives, with the way
          the Board has functioned. There were reports by the Government Nominees of
          meetings having been postponed because a quorum could not be formed, and of
          constraints with travelling arrangements. This seems to have detracted from the
          interest and commitment that should be demonstrated by the key partners, and
          consequently, on the „ownership‟ of the project.

         The “area based project approach” suggested by this structure has not been fully
          realised. There has been a rapid turnover of project staff at the Juba office, and as at
          the time of the field visits there was no resident staff there.

         A new Area Project Coordinator for the North (based in Khartoum) has just been
          appointed, and he operates without a Project Assistant (as proposed in the structure).
          The same applies to the Project Support Unit which, as at the time of this review, is
          manned only by the National TOKTEN Database and Advocacy Assistant, with
          oversight provided by the Project Manager, a position that has become vacant. This
          situation would seem to impose a tremendous burden on the team in Khartoum
          which now has to supervise project implementation in the vast areas of the North and
          the South. This has serious implications both for programme efficiency and
          effectiveness.

         It would appear that TOKTEN has not received the full measure of enthusiasm and
          support from the UNDP regional offices that are to be expected for a UNDP project.
          In the view of the Consultant, such support could go a long way to further strengthen
          the project‟s management structure, and thereby enhance its efficiency and
          effectiveness.



4
    UNDP TOKTEN Sudan Project Document

                                                                                                     24
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

2. Relevance to Support Needs of Institutions: The recruitment of TOKTEN Volunteers is
demand-driven, based on requests by Sudanese national institutions and organisations.
According to the available project documents, requesting institutions submit to the TOKTEN
Team their requests focusing on their identified needs in specific areas within the “thematic
areas” of support. Detailed Terms of Reference (ToR) are then prepared “by the TOKTEN
Team”, and published on the TOKTEN website. The final selection of applicants is then made in
consultation with the „requesting‟ institutions (see Annex 9 for the Selection Criteria for
TOKTEN Volunteers).

    The Consultant observes that:
     This selection procedure has the requisite built-in mechanism for assuring that
       TOKTEN support is actually tailored to the human capacity development needs of
       the „benefiting‟ institutions.

       The procedure is predicated, of course, on the assumption that these institutions
        have the necessary needs-assessment skills, and precise capacity development
        plans for their personnel. All the 14 institutions involved in this review indicated
        that this formed a part of their annual plans.

       The general claim, however, is that lack of resources imposes a serious constraint
        to the extent to which these plans are actualised, and so TOKTEN provides a much
        welcome option to their capacity development needs.

       Having said this, it does not seem certain that all requests for TOKTEN Volunteers
        are based on a carefully thought-out needs assessment by the requesting
        institutions. The Consultant encountered a case during the field visits in which the
        institution lacked the very basic facilities for facilitating the TOKTEN assignment
        (establishing a website and e-library). The assignment was not completed, and
        there was no physical evidence of what was done. The authorities in the institution
        who were interviewed (and who were not there when the assignment was carried
        out) claimed to have no knowledge of what was done. Ironically, although the
        Volunteer‟s expertise was rated as „excellent‟ by a staff of the institution who
        worked with him, the amount of knowledge he was able to pass on was rated as
        „minimal‟. This may be an isolated case, but it exemplifies the inherent danger in
        basing TOKTEN assignments on inadequate institutional needs assessments.


    Quotes from Host Institutions
    “Yes, the knowledge and skills he passed on to our people were badly needed,
    although he spent only a short time with us. Our broadcasts have improved
    considerably, and the skills acquired by our staff are being passed on to others. We
    would like him to come back again”.
    (A typical reaction from a Host Institution)

    “The TOKTEN Volunteer came at a time when ... was just establishing her
    administrative support and the Internet facilities and power could not enable efficient
    functioning of the work. Hence ... did not benefit much from the TOKTEN project”.          25
    (An atypical reaction from a Host Institution)
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

      Quote from a TOKTEN Volunteer
      The project should “engage the volunteers in writing the proposals of the assignments.
      This could give the volunteers an opportunity to discuss the needs of the host
      institutions with the authorities and hence writing up a proposal that satisfies these
      needs”.


6.3       Programme Efficiency

6.3.1 Cost-Effectiveness of TOKTEN

The first concern in assessing the efficiency of the project is to determine its cost-effectiveness
compared to other viable options. As stated in all the relevant documents (see Annexes 10 and 11
for how TOKTEN works, and conditions of service for volunteers), TOKTEN Volunteers are
considered International Consultants who volunteer their services to their country of origin.
UNDP covers the travel expenses to and from Sudan for the Volunteer, and provides a living
allowance (pro-rated according to location of assignment) while in Sudan, as well as support for
medical and life insurance. The documents are emphatic that salaries are not paid.

TOKTEN assignments range from one week to a maximum of three months. According to
TOKTEN records, a three-week assignment costs between $4,000 to $6,000. While it was not
possible to obtain estimates from most Host Institutions for training staff abroad, one institution
indicated that it would cost well over $4,000 to send one staff on a four-week training course in
Procurement Procedures (the precise area of TOKTEN assignment to that institution) outside the
country. The TOKTEN Volunteer who came trained 50 personnel. This rather rough analysis is,
to the mind of the Consultant, indicative of the cost efficiency of TOKTEN. A careful study of
TOKTEN assignments over the four years since its inception (see Annex 12) was done by the
Consultant. This, coupled with information from interviews and focus group discussions with
host institutions and beneficiary staff, revealed that these assignments have been predominantly
in areas for which local training is either non-existent or grossly inadequate.

On their part, Host Institutions are expected to select the right calibre of staff for the training, and
to generally provide the enabling environment for the TOKTEN assignment. This includes
allowing sufficient time off for the trainees and making available the necessary facilities and
equipment to enable the necessary transfer of knowledge and skills.

      It is the view of the Consultant that:
       TOKTEN indeed constitutes a cost-effective option for human capacity
           development in many critical areas of need of Sudanese institutions.

         The inputs by some Host institutions, however, are less than optimal and this serves
          to limit the full benefits of some TOKTEN assignments. The majority of beneficiary
          personnel interviewed complained of not having been allowed enough time from
          work for the training sessions; or not having the necessary equipment needed for
          their training. In at least one case, this led to the assignment not being completed.

                                                                                                     26
    December
             MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
    29, 2009

       In the Consultant‟s view, an intrinsic and unquantifiable value of TOKTEN is the
        overt enthusiasm indicated by all the Volunteers who were either interviewed or
        responded to the questionnaire for the opportunity offered them by the project to be of
        service to their country. The value of this is demonstrated in their self-admitted
        commitment to complete their assignments as best as possible, and to continue to
        maintain links with their host institutions and offer assistance long after their
        assignments. The quotes below are suggestive of this intrinsic value.

    Quotes from TOKTEN Volunteers
    “Had it not been for TOKTEN, I would not have been able to share the expertise I have
    gained (and still do) from my research and teaching experience in the United States
    (where I taught for 5 years) and Canada (my second home now and where I have been
    teaching for 5 years). I can frankly say: TOKTEN has been God-sent gift both for me and
    the people who have attended my course”.

    “TOKTEN is a good programme and I wish it will continue as long as possible to assist
    in the development of Sudan”


6.3.2 Quality of TOKTEN Volunteers Recruited; and Assignments to Host Institutions

1. Recruitment of TOKTEN Volunteers: In this review, the „quality‟ of TOKTEN Volunteers
recruited is considered a critical input factor that determines project efficiency. Qualifications
and professional experience are used here as the more measurable indicators of quality.

Documentary evidence shows that there are clearly defined criteria for TOKTEN selection.
These include:
    University degree (Bachelor or higher)
    Minimum five years of relevant working experience in a professional area
    At least 25 years of age (there is no upper limit)
    Ability to work in partnership and adjust to difficult living conditions
    Genuine interest and commitment to rebuilding Sudan, and willingness to share skills and
       knowledge
    Documentary evidence of living abroad as Sudanese-origin with permanent resident
       status or nationality of another country apart from Sudan5

The document further indicates that the criteria above are the minimum requirements; and that
final selection depends on meeting “the requirements specified by requesting organisations and
institutions for different assignments” 5.




5
 Transfer of Knowledge Through Expatriate Nationals (TOKTEN): Join TOKTEN as Expatriate Professional
(www.sd.undp.org/projects/tokten/htm)

                                                                                                       27
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

Table 1 below shows a summary of TOKTEN Volunteers‟ qualifications from 2006 to 2009
(derived from Annex 12).

Table 1: Qualifications of TOKTEN Volunteers – 2006-2009

 Qualification          2006            2007             2008             2009           Total
Ph.D.                    10               5                5                9             29
M.A./M.Sc.                3               2                3                1              9
B.A./B.Sc.                1               0                0                0              1
Higher                    1               0                2                1              4
Diploma/Other
Qualifications
      Total              15               7               10               11              43


      Fig. 3: Percentage distribution of qualifications of TOKTEN Volunteers – 2006-2009




      The Consultant notes that: The recruitment of TOKTEN Volunteers so far has been
       very much within the specified criteria for recruitment of the project. As Figure 3
       above shows, the majority of them hold postgraduate qualifications in their respective
       disciplines (Ph.D. [68%], Master‟s degrees [21%]). The small fraction of those without
       postgraduate degrees hold higher certificates, diplomas, or other professional
       qualifications in highly specialised areas that, to the mind of the Consultant, make them
       suitable for recruitment. The only Volunteer so far recruited with a first degree
       specialises in Software Engineering and System Development, adjudged to be a rare
       area of need for Sudanese institutions.




                                                                                                   28
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

      A scrutiny of the résumés of the Volunteers also shows that they all have had
       considerable years of experience (ranging from 5years to above 20 years) in reputable
       institutions and organisations in the Diaspora – some of them globally recognised in
       their professions.

      The Consultant concludes, therefore, that the TOKTEN Volunteers recruited so far
       are of very high quality, and possess the requisite competence to transfer meaningful
       and substantial knowledge and skills to others.

2. Assignment of TOKTEN Volunteers: The assignments of TOKTEN Volunteers according to
Thematic Area as well as to Location are examined in this review. The Tables and Figures below
illustrate the pattern of assignments so far.

  The Consultant notes that:
   While assignments have been made to all Thematic Areas, the bulk have been to
     Education, Training and Research (15%), followed by Health (9%), Business and
     Sustainable Livelihood and Development (7%), and Governance and Rule of Law (6%).
     Very few assignments have been made in the areas of Sustainable Natural Resources
     and Environmental Conservation, and Gender and Development.

      The relatively low level of assignments to the Governance and Rule of Law theme does
       not seem to reflect UNDP Sudan‟s current focus on this area in the light of the
       unfolding political, social and economic realities of the country, and the need to
       strength institutional capacity in these areas.

      There has been a disproportionate number of assignments to Khartoum relative to the
       other areas.

      Having said this, it is recognised that TOKTEN assignments are based on demands
       from institutions and organisations. We infer, therefore, that the pattern of assignments
       is a reflection of the demand pattern from the different locations, and across the
       Thematic Areas. The Project Team actually indicated that more demands are received
       from Khartoum than all other locations, and particularly for the Thematic Areas that
       have the greater number of assignments.

      These patterns of demand for, and assignment of TOKTEN Volunteers is, to the mind
       of the Consultant, a reflection of the degree of advocacy of the project, among other
       things. One notices a decline both in demand and supply of Volunteers in 2007 and
       2008, with a slight rise in 2009. This seems to indicate the need for greater sensitisation
       of both potential host institutions and Volunteers. Some of the quotes below may well
       be a pointer to the need for more vibrant advocacy, and particularly the need to upgrade
       the project‟s website.



                                                                                                     29
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

  Quotes from TOKTEN Team Members
  “Two possible reasons for wide variations, namely: the demand-driven approach; the
  second one is the level of awareness about the project in the region. And this depends on
  the advocacy that region received from the project. It will be admitted that the project
  advocacy missions didn’t cover many parts of the country yet”

  “It varies from governance and rule of law to other areas of health, education, poverty, etc.
  They are not appropriately sampled due to the fact that some of the institutions have
  dominated as they get use of the demand driven approach and the first-in-first-served
  principle of TOKTEN”.

  “New updates [to the TOKTEN website] have been made and there are more to be added”

  Quotes from TOKTEN Volunteers
  “The website of TOKTEN-Sudan provides most of the required information about the
  programme for me as a volunteer. However the host institutions may not find sufficient
  information in the website to help them in understanding the essence of the programme and
  in putting proposal for assignments”.

  “Almost, all the information I needed both on the program and its service were available
  on the website. It might help, however, to clarify how to join TOKTEN’s roster in a bullet
  format. That is, in 1, 2, 3/a, b, c, format, it should be made clear: what exactly is involved
  in being a TOKTEN volunteer. I had to call sometimes to get information. When service
  was provided, however, it was a world-class service”.

  Quotes from Host Institutions
  “Actually we did not know about TOKTEN before. It was from the Ministry of Development
  and Planning that we got to know about it”.

  “It was from a 2007 UNDP television discussion that we got to know about TOKTEN”


     Table 2: Number of requests from institutions for TOKTEN Volunteers - 2006-2009

                            Requests
                            2006 2007          2008       2009      Total
                            24     23          23         19        89

(Note: It was not possible to obtain a breakdown of these requests according to location and
Thematic Area, much as that was desired. Furthermore, meeting these requests depended on the
availability of Volunteers, as the Consultant was informed; and requests made in one year could
only be met in subsequent years)




                                                                                                   30
           December
                    MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
           29, 2009

      Table 3: Assignment of TOKTEN Volunteers according to Thematic Areas – 2006-2009
     Thematic Areas                                           Volunteers Assigned                              Total for
                                   2006                   2007                    2008             2009        Thematic
                                                                                                                 Area
                               M    F      T       M        F      T       M       F     T    M     F     T
Governance and Rule of Law     2    0      2       1        0      1        1      0     1    2     0     2       6

Gender in Development             0    0    0       0      0       0       0      0      0    1     0     1       1

Sustainable Natural Resource      0    0    0       0      0       0       1      0      1    0     0     0       1
and Environmental
Conservation and Management


Business and Sustainable          2    0    2       1      0       1       0      1      1    3     0     3       7
Livelihood and Development


Agriculture, Food Security, and   1    0    1       2      0       2       0      0      0    0     1     1       4
Rural Development

Health                            2    1    3       1      0       1       5      0      5    0     0     0       9
Education, Training and           7    0    7       2      0       2       2      0      2    4     0     4       15
Research
TOTAL PER YEAR                    14   1   15      7       0       7      9       1      10   10    1     11     43




                                                                                                                  31
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009




                                             32
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

Fig. 4: Percentage distribution of TOKTEN assignments according to Thematic Area - 2006-
       2009




Table 4: TOKTEN assignments according to location 2006-2009
                                                      Year                        Total per
          Location                                                                location
                                   2006        2007          2008        2009
                              13           4             9           7            33
Khartoum
                              2            2             0           0            4
Juba
                              0            1             1           2            4
Kassala
                              0            0             0           1            1
Blue Nile
                              0            0             0           0            0
South Kurdofan
                              0            0             0           1            1
Red Sea
Other States(Gezira State)    1            0             0           1            2

                              16           7             10          12           45
Total per year

Note: Actual number of assignments made over the period is 43. The reason for the increase in
the total number above is the overlapping of some assignments (highlighted) in some locations
(i.e. the same assignment is divided into two separate locations such as Khartoum and Kassala
for the same Volunteers).
                                                                                            33
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

Fig. 5: Percentage distribution of TOKTEN assignments according to location – 2006-2009




3. Duration of TOKTEN Assignments: According to project documents, assignments are for
short periods (one to eight weeks in various development areas), although some flexibility is
allowed for extensions for up to three months, based on mutual agreement among the TOKTEN
Volunteer, the TOKTEN Project management, and the Host Institution. In principle, most
assignments are designed to be completed within the stipulated timeframe. Table 4 below shows
the percentage distribution of responses of Host Institutions and TOKTEN Volunteers to the item
on satisfaction with the duration of assignment.

Table 5: Level of satisfaction of Host Institutions and TOKTEN Volunteers (n=17) with
        duration of assignments
                                                                     Dissatisfied



                                                                                    Dissatisfied


                                                                                                   Applicable
                                             Satisfied
                                                         Satisfied
                                              Very




                                                                                       Very


                                                                                                     Not




                       Respondent
                 Host Institutions           29.4        29.4 23.6                  17.6           0.0

                 TOKTEN Volunteers           70.6        11.8 17.6                  0.0            0.0


It is of interest to the Consultant that a larger percentage of Volunteers than Host Institutions
indicated that they were “very satisfied” with the duration of the assignments. There was the
indication that their satisfaction derived mainly from the fact that they were able to complete
their work plans within the stipulated period. Discussions with some of the beneficiaries
revealed, however, that the predominant activities of most of the assignments consisted in formal
lectures, demonstrations, and seminars, with relatively little time spent on practical work by the
participants themselves. A number of them also complained of having to combine their normal

                                                                                                                34
    December
             MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
    29, 2009

work with training, thus imposing an additional burden on their time. This may have accounted
for the pattern of their responses observed above.

    The Consultant notes that:
     It is not clear the extent to which the duration of assignments is predicated on a
       thorough analysis of activities involved in each assignment. It is clear that some
       activities, especially those that involve a great deal of practical exercises would require
       more time than others. The ToR for Volunteers lack some details in this respect.

         TOKTEN Volunteers tend to opt for assignments at a time that coincides with their
          leave period. For many of them, this is usually in the second half of the year. This
          would seem to impose some constraints on meeting requests from institutions at certain
.
          times of the year. Moreover, without special incentives, many volunteers cannot risk
          their permanent jobs for TOKTEN assignments beyond a certain period.

         Some assignments considered of a „special‟ nature, and which could not be finished
          within the stipulated time, have been repeated (i.e. the TOKTEN Volunteer is
          contracted for another assignment period the following year). This would seem to add
          value to such assignments.

         Beneficiary staffs generally desire more time to be allocated to training assignments,
          especially in those areas that require greater practise of skills. They are also of the
          strong opinion that some time specially set apart for training by their institutions would
          greatly enhance their acquisition of knowledge and skills.

6.3.3 Work Environment of Host Institutions

TOKTEN assignment to institutions is based on a clear understanding that the so-called „host
institutions‟ should provide an enabling environment for the meaningful transfer of knowledge
and skills to their staff. This includes physical facilities such as office space, classrooms,
laboratory, and the necessary equipment for the training.

Almost without exception, all the institutions visited or which responded to the questionnaire
indicated that they could not meet all the requirements for the training. This is especially so for
training that requires special equipment and facilities (e.g. computers, laboratory facilities, etc.).
Where these exist, they are usually inadequate or in a relatively poor state. Invariably,
Volunteers and trainees alike have to improvise, or adopt methods that minimise the dependence
on such facilities (e.g. relying more on lectures, seminars, and demonstrations).

        The Consultant notes, therefore, that:
         Some Host Institutions have not always met their obligation to provide an
           environment that could facilitate and maximise the transfer of knowledge. This has
           implications for the effectiveness of TOKTEN assignments, as well as for the
           sustainability of the knowledge and skills passed on. In the isolated case cited
           earlier, the TOKTEN assignment could not be completed precisely because of
           inadequate facilities in the Host Institution.
                                                                                                       35
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

6.4     Programme Effectiveness

6.4.1 Programme Progress to Date

The UNDP TOKTEN Project Team has a detailed system of reporting on programme progress
through Mid-Year and Annual Progress Reports. In addition to these reports are the evaluation
reports by Host Institutions and the TOKTEN Volunteers, as well as training evaluation reports
from beneficiary personnel (see Annexes). Together, these reports have proved valuable in this
review. The assessment of progress in this section is made against the targets set in the 2006
Project Document. There is no evidence available to the Consultant that these targets have been
revised.

1. Coverage of TOKTEN: At the beginning of the project, 10 states had been targeted to be
covered by TOKTEN. As at end of 2009, however, only 6 states have received TOKTEN
assignments (see Table 4), with the highest share going to Khartoum. Three of these states have
received no more than 2 assignments for the period under review.

2. TOKTEN Volunteers Recruited and Assigned: According to the Project Document, 200
TOKTEN Volunteers are to be recruited (starting with 8 in 2007, and 12 in 2009). Table 4 above
shows that to date, 43 Volunteers have been recruited and assigned, with a significant decline in
numbers in 2007 and 2008.

3. Personnel Trained: Table 5 below shows the number of personnel who have benefitted so far
from TOKTEN assignments across the thematic Areas. This is far in excess of the 1000 initially
targeted for training.

Table 6: Number of personnel who have benefited from TOKTEN training 2006-2009

              Thematic Area                               Beneficiaries              Total for
                                                 2006     2007    2008       2009    Thematic
                                                                                       Area

Governance and Rule of Law                        51       60        60       130        301
Gender in Development                              0        0        0        100        100
Sustainable Natural Resource and                   0        0        30        0         30
Environmental Conservation and Management

Business and Sustainable Livelihood and           80       40        35       179        334
Development
Agriculture, Food Security, and Rural             40       41        0        25         106
Development
Health                                            155      30       155        0         340
Education, Training and Research                  881      50        47       163       1141
TOTAL PER YEAR                                   1207      221      327      597        2352


                                                                                               36
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

 Available records as well as information gathered from discussions with Host institutions and
beneficiary staff indicate that those who have been selected for training are generally of the
appropriate level of education and professional status. The observation, however, is that this has
not always been the case (see observations on knowledge transfer below).

4. TOKTEN Project Management, Information and Advocacy System: The management
framework for TOKTEN has largely been put in place, except at the level of Project Team for
Juba (see Fig. 1). A rapid turnover of staff has been experienced in the South. The Area
Coordinator, South, as well as the Operations Assistant left, and the Project Manager is currently
redeployed elsewhere. However, a new Area Coordinator, North, has been recruited to support
the project operations, while the vacant posts in the south are in the short listing process.

With regard to the Information and Advocacy System, a National Database and Advocacy
Assistant has been recruited, and a TOKTEN website has been established and is currently
undergoing upgrading. A database containing 350 TOKTEN Volunteers has so far been
established, and is expected to be expanded by a planned mapping of expatriate Sudanese in the
Diaspora.

Over the years advocacy visits have been paid to such areas as the Blue Nile, Kassala, White
Nile, Gezira and Juba. Local governments in these states have been sensitised about the
opportunity to seek expert support through TOKTEN Volunteers. In addition, visits have also
been made to Federal line ministries such as Ministry of Finance and National Economy,
Ministry of Interior, Ministry of Labour and several universities. Overall, these visits are
reported to have “resulted in a number of requests submitted by local institutions for specific
TOKTEN assignments, in keeping with the TOKTEN policy of demand-driven technical
support. The project further supported government institutions through advisory services in
developing terms of reference for the experts”6.

From reports generated by the project (mainly from the Volunteers and the Host Institutions),
case stories have been written and published in websites and the national media. In addition,
media interviews have been conducted with some of the volunteers and the Project Team on
issues related to the assignments and TOKTEN project modalities. This is reported to have
“created a very good motivator for the volunteers having seen the appreciation of the efforts they
are exerting in building the capacity of governance related areas of their country”6. The project is
also reported to have gained great support from senior management in UNDP who have
participated in some events in addition to their regular attendance at the inauguration photo
sessions According to this same report, the project has started the procurement of diverse
advocacy materials such as pamphlets, banners, T-shirts, caps, hats, etc. Some of these materials
were actually delivered during the review process.




6
    TOKTEN Sudan Annual Progress Report January-December 2009

                                                                                                 37
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009

The Consultant observes that:
 In terms of coverage, the project still falls far short of the targeted 10 states. Of the
   six states already covered, TOKTEN presence in 3 is very minimal. Khartoum has
   received the greatest share of assignments so far.

   The project also falls short of the targeted 200 Volunteers that are to be recruited. To
    date only 43 have been recruited. Related to this is the construction of the database of
    potential volunteers which stands at 350 currently, as against the projection of 1000
    by end of the project. It is also not clear how strong a partnership TOKTEN has
    established with similar initiatives inside and outside the country.

   The project has far exceeded the target of 1000 beneficiaries initially anticipated.
    Training in certain priority areas (e.g. Governance and Rule of Law) still needs to be
    accelerated.

   As has been indicated earlier, the project has suffered from an unstable management
    structure at the Area Coordination level. The full complement of staff has not been
    achieved, and programme support from UNDP sub-offices in the other states does
    not appear reassuring so far.

   The Database and Advocacy mechanism of the project still has much to achieve both
    within and outside the country. Connecting TOKTEN with other relevant Sudanese
    associations as well as similar initiatives in the Diaspora is yet to be meaningfully
    achieved.

   Related to the above is the fact that there is little evidence of advocacy for the use of
    TOKTEN Volunteers in other UNDP and UN agencies‟ capacity development
    initiatives.

   TOKTEN partnership links with government appears weak at the moment, and seems
    to be limited to getting government and related institutions to commit themselves
    only to providing “conducive environments” for training to take place. We note that
    one of the activities proposed in the Project Document is to persuade government and
    NGOs to incorporate TOKTEN volunteer costs in their budgets. There is no evidence
    available to the Consultant that this is being done.

   There is no evidence that the project has addressed the target of conducting “at least
    one Consultative Forum involving stakeholders in areas of project coverage
    conducted for review of the project progress”.




                                                                                                38
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

6.4.2 Knowledge Transferred and its Use

Two key objectives of this review are to:
     Determine whether or not useful knowledge has been transferred to Sudanese institutions,
        and
     Determine whether that knowledge has been appropriately used.
The Consultant recognises that these are objectives that are, in the context of this review,
difficult to measure in precise terms as to do so would require the use of conventional methods
(achievement and performance tests), for which time and logistics did not allow.

A case study approach is therefore adopted in addressing the above objectives. It is hoped that
these case studies would be illustrative of whether or not knowledge has been transferred, and
how it is being used. The selection of these case studies is based on field visits to the
institutions, discussions with beneficiary personnel, and/or scrutiny of relevant records.

    Case Study1: The Kassala Radio and TV Corporation

    The Kassala Radio and TV Corporation (KRTC) is the major (if not only) local radio
    and TV station that operates in Kassala State, in the East of Sudan, close to the border
    with Ethiopia and Eritrea. Broadcasting about 5 hours a day, KRTC brings to the people
    of Kassala local, national, and international news, as well as features on diverse issues
    such as culture, health, education, development, arts, drama, and peace building. There
    is no doubt that KRTC makes an enormous contribution to the education and awareness
    of entire communities in the State.

    Operating with modest facilities, KRTC employs about 128 personnel, the majority of
    who have no formal training in radio and TV broadcasting. What more, opportunities
    for the appropriate training is non-existent in Kassala, and the cost of sending staff
    outside for training is one the Corporation could ill afford. In 2007, however, the
    Director General of KRTC got to learn about TOKTEN from a UNDP-sponsored
    advocacy television discussion programme. Jumping at the opportunity, he contacted
    the TOKTEN Project Team, and eventually completed all the necessary application
    formalities     which      were     published     in     the    TOKTEN        website
    (www.sd.undp.org/projects/tokten/htm).

    Mohamed Khalid Ahmed, seasoned journalist and broadcaster with the BBC Arabic
    Service, saw the advertisement on the web, and decided to spend his well-earned leave
    passing on his accumulated knowledge and experience in broadcasting to his
    compatriots in Kassala. He applied and was recruited as TOKTEN Volunteer in October
    2008.

    For ten days (13th to 23rd October), Khalid, relying more on his expertise than on the
    scanty facilities at KRTC, provided training for 35 journalists on a number of issues that
    include:
         1. Analysis of the media landscape in Sudan
         2. Writing cues for stories, interviews and clips
                                                                                                 39
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009

    3. Editorial ethics, standards and values
    4. Radio and TV interviewing skills
    5. Voice delivery practical skills, and a number of others.

An overwhelming number of the trainees adjudged the topics to have been „adequately
covered” (75%); “well presented” (96%); and “very relevant” (91%) to their work; and
that the knowledge and skills gained “will improve their professional skills in the media
field”.

According to the management of KRTC, programme delivery has improved
significantly to the point that more patronage has been received which has enabled the
Corporation acquire new equipment, and expand its coverage and its broadcast hours.

(Story composed from UNDP Press Release No.33; and the Evaluation by Host
Institution, and Beneficiaries’ Evaluation Forms)


Case Study 2; Electronic Health Records in Soba Hospital

Established in 1975, Soba University Hospital provides primary health care to the local
population as well as secondary and tertiary health care to patients from all over Sudan.
In addition, the hospital offers several courses and training programmes.

Over the 30 years of its existence, the hospital has accumulated an overwhelming
amount of paper files that have started to pose several problems. Patients coming to the
hospital spend a great deal of time sorting out their forms, and taking them for one
signature or the other. The amount of time involved in doing this not only poses a risk
to those in emergency situations, but tremendous inconvenience to the serious ill who
might not be mobile. Added to this is the risk of records of former treatment and
prescriptions being misplaced, and previous consultations and referrals difficult to find.

In 2007, the authorities of Soba Hospital solicited the support of TOKTEN to help bring
a Sudanese expert to lead the process of shifting from a paper-based fling system to a
computerised one. The authorities reckoned that this would not only cut health costs,
but would also significantly improve efficiency and quality of service.

In response to this request, TOKTEN liaised with Dr. Tilal Abdellatif Eldabi, a
Sudanese expatriate with a PhD in healthcare modelling, and a lecturer at University of
Brunel in the UK. Dr. Eldabi agreed to volunteer his time and experience to support the
establishment of an electronic patient system in Soba Hospital.

Dr. Eldabi was first deployed by TOKTEN to Soba Hospital in August 2007. During his
first assignment, he designed the pilot phase of the outpatient department system. He
also outlined the planning for upcoming phases and trained 30 medical staff on the
computerized records system.

                                                                                             40
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009

On his second assignment, Dr. Eldabi designed a detailed interface and data flow of the
outpatient department system and began implementation of the system in collaboration
with the hospital‟s IT department among others. Dr. Eldabi also trained 35 staff on how
to use the new electronic recording system. During his next assignment, Dr. Eldabi is
planning to tackle the other inpatient records system.
(Culled from UNDP Sudan Bulletin, Vol.2)


Case Study 3: Establishing an E-Library at the Juba Judiciary

The Judiciary of the Government of Southern Sudan (GoSS) is one of the many critical
arms of government that need capacity enhancement to enable them function properly
in the new political dispensation that is characterised by decentralisation. Years of war
have eroded whatever physical facilities there were, and significantly depleted the
human resource base of the judiciary, as indeed of most other institutions of state.

Access to a legal library was identified as one of the many urgent needs of the
Judiciary. It was determined that without access to the rich stock of global legal
literature, there was no way the judiciary can function effectively. Books, journals, and
other types of legal literature were, however, difficult to come by, and very expensive
to import. The solution, it was thought, was to establish a website and an electronic
library (E-library) at the Judiciary that would provide almost unlimited access to global
legal knowledge. The first problem, however, was to get someone with the requisite
expertise to do so. The answer was found in the TOKTEN project, or so it was thought.

TOKTEN Sudan was approached and a competent software engineer and systems
developer was recruited and assigned to the Juba Judiciary in 2006. Upon arrival,
however, the Volunteer discovered that the Judiciary was desperately lacking in the
vital facilities to make the assignment possible. Only a few rather decrepit computers
were available, the internet bandwidth too limited to accommodate the project, and
electricity supply was erratic and unpredictable. What more, only one staff had some
rudimentary knowledge to be of assistance to him, and to benefit from the assignment.
The TOKTEN Volunteer spent most of the time in the UNDP Sub-office (where
electricity, at least, was assured) designing a website and E-library which, he hoped,
would one day be of use when the needed facilities are in place. The staff assigned to
him knew little of what was done, nor is there evidence that he could have utilised the
knowledge anyway. A new administration came to the Judiciary which knew nothing
about the assignment as the records could not even be traced. Notwithstanding this, the
solitary staff member who could have benefited was optimistic during the Consultant‟s
field visit: “I suggest that TOKTEN should come back and continue with the activities
that were left halfway”.

(Story composed from available UNDP documents and interview with Host Institution)


                                                                                            41
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009

Case Study 4: Wastewater Treatment Plant in Red Sea State

Rainfall, groundwater, and possible desalination of sea water constitute the major water
resources in the Red Sea State, situated in the Nubian Desert. Population growth and
industrial development, however, have combined to put tremendous stress on these
sources of water, while at the same time increasing the volume of wastewater available
for reuse.

Without a wastewater treatment plant, the people of the state could not harness this
vital source of additional water, although its existence was recognised. Rather, there
was a heavy reliance on the use of septic tanks, with the health risk and high cost that
accompany this. To alleviate this situation, the Government of the Red Sea State
proposed the development of the first wastewater treatment plant system in Port Sudan,
the state capital. Such a system would enable the city to reuse treated domestic
wastewater for home use as well as for irrigation. The facility would open 24 hours a
day, recycling dirty water into clean water for use.

Professor Nassereldeen Kabashi, a Sudanese Associate Professor with the International
Islamic University was recruited as TOKTEN Volunteer in 2009, and deployed to Port
Sudan to design the first wastewater plant system in the city to become a model for the
entire state. Part of his assignment is to train personnel in analysing available data and
maps to select the suitable drainage for Port Sudan city, provide hands-on training on
developing the terms of reference for the implementation of the identified drainage
system, and advise the responsible institution on all issues related to the establishment
of the drainage.

(Culled from UNDP Bulletin, Vol. 5 – Special Edition: UNDP in Eastern Sudan)


Case Study 5: Criminal Justice Statistical Information System at the Ministry of
Interior

The Ministry of Interior of the Government of National Unity (GNU), Sudan, has the
onerous task of supervising the Police and Prisons Services, among others, in a vast
country. The long years of war, displacement of whole communities, rapid internal and
external migrations, and the rising incidence of crime, have combined to make this task
even more complex.

Without a reliable statistical system for monitoring and recording crimes, the criminal
justice system was all but in disarray. The Ministry desperately lacked the expertise to
develop such a system. Hiring an international expert for an extended period to do so
would cost a huge amount which the Ministry simply cannot afford. This was the
dilemma facing the Ministry when Brigadier Magdi Mohamed Hassan, Director of the
Statistical Justice Unit, learnt about the TOKTEN Project in 2006. Wasting no time, he
made the appropriate contacts with the Project, and was guided in making a formal
request for a TOKTEN Volunteer.
                                                                                             42
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009


   In 2006, Professor Maghoub Mohamed Elbushra, Professor in Criminal law and Criminal
   Justice in the United Arab Emirates, was assigned to the Ministry of Interior as TOKTEN
   Volunteer. His Terms of Reference were very ambitious. He was to:
       - Draft a law to organise criminal justice statistics
       - Establish a department of police statistics
       - Outline mechanisms of data collection and analysis
       - Design forms for criminal justice statistics department
       - Introduce concepts of computerisation of the criminal justice system operations

   This was to be the first of four assignments of one month each stretching from 2006 to
   2009. Within that period, Prof. Elbushra has been able to firmly establish a Police
   Statistics Unit, refine plans and strategies for criminal justice statistics, and establish the
   software system for this. Over 300 security personnel, including 54 newly recruited
   officers with a statistical background have benefitted from his training. Moreover, a
   network of criminal justice statistics has been establish in 11 major police stations in the
   country, and 5 more are at an advanced stage of being linked up. The personnel who
   benefitted from his training have gone on to train others, thereby enlarging the pool of
   security officers with the requisite competence in criminal justice statistics.

   So resounding was the success of Prof. Elbushra‟s TOKTEN assignments that it was said
   to have attracted the attention, and commendation, of no less a person than His
   Excellency the President himself. Little wonder then that this particular Volunteer is
   considered something of an icon in TOKTEN project circles.

   (Story composed from available UNDP documents and interview with Host Institution)



These case studies are indicative of the knowledge transfer tasks of TOKTEN Volunteers, and, in
some cases, how successfully or otherwise this has been done. In addition to the anecdotal
evidence contained in the case studies, data on the level of satisfaction of Host Institutions with
the contribution of the Volunteers to the capacity development of their staff was obtained. Table
6 below presents the findings.

Table 7: Level of satisfaction of Host Institutions (n=17) with TOKTEN Volunteers’
        contribution to capacity development of personnel
                                                                       Dissatisfied



                                                                                      Dissatisfied


                                                                                                     Applicable
                                               Satisfied
                                                           Satisfied
                                                Very




                                                                                         Very


                                                                                                       Not




                       Respondent
                 Host Institutions            70.6         23.5 5.9                   0.0            0.0


                                                                                                                  43
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009


    The Consultant observes that:
     In the majority of cases encountered during this review, there is evidence that
       knowledge has, indeed, been transferred through TOKTEN Volunteers, and this
       knowledge has been found useful by the beneficiaries.

       It is difficult, however, to quantify the knowledge transferred, and how it is actually
        being utilised without conducting performance assessment workshops, an aspect
        that is not apparent in the current monitoring and evaluation mechanism of the
        project.

       The amount of knowledge transferred (and ultimately used) is a function of the
        duration of training, quality of supportive facilities, opportunity to practise while
        training, and the complexity of the knowledge and skills themselves, among other
        things.

       A key factor in the effectiveness of training is the capacity of the personnel selected
        to be trained. Although the Host Institutions indicate that those they select for the
        training are generally of the right level of competence to benefit from it, there are
        indications, however, that this is not always the case. In one instance the Volunteer
        concluded that “the vast majority of personnel who attended the course were not
        involved in any modelling work which comprised the core of the course. Thus I
        believe that they were not suitable to have that course.... [Only] about 8 people out
        of the 30 who attended the course [actually benefitted]”.

       As has been observed earlier, one of the case studies seems to indicate that the
        particular TOKTEN assignment was not actually what the institution needed at the
        time. Consequently, what was done had no utility value, at least in the short run.

6.4.3 Monitoring and Evaluation

A clear monitoring and evaluation (M&E) mechanism is defined for the project. In principle, the
monitoring and evaluation of each assignment are the responsible of both the TOKTEN Project
Team and the Host Institution. At the completion of an assignment, the following evaluation
procedures are carried out:

    1. A TOKTEN Volunteer Final Report form is completed (by the Volunteer), detailing the
        work done and the achievements based on the ToR.
    2. A TOKTEN Volunteer’s Evaluation of Activities, which requires the Volunteer to assess
        the benefits that have accrued to the institution from his assignment. His satisfaction
        with the assignment, and the competence of the trainees, among others.
    3. Evaluation by the Host Institution of the Volunteer‟s execution of the assignment.
    4. Training Evaluation of the efficiency of the training by the trainees.
    5. Impact Assessment of the Assignment, which provides an opportunity for the Host
        Institution to assess the benefits that have accrued to it from the training.
                                                                                                  44
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009


In addition to these, the Project Team is required to conduct “continuous monitoring, periodic
reviews, and adequate reporting...to provide timely information and early warning to
stakeholders”. Mid-year and Annual Progress Reports are required and are regularly submitted
by the Project Team.

      It is the View of the Consultant that:
       The M&E mechanism of the project seems, generally, to be appropriate. However,
           there are instances of Host Institutions submitting their evaluation reports much later
           than required, thereby delaying the evaluation process.

         The procedure for assessing impact does not include performance assessment
          workshops, which are likely to provide more reliable data than simply obtaining the
          views of Host Institutions.

         It is not clear the extent to which stakeholders, especially Host Institutions, are
          provided with a feedback on TOKTEN assignments. The Project Document
          proposes, as one of the output targets for each year, “at least one Consultative
          Forum involving stakeholders in areas of project overage conducted for review of
          the project progress”. Such feedback may be a useful means of advocacy and for
          fostering a sense of ownership among the relevant stakeholders, including
          government institutions.

6.5       Programme Impact

The Consultant notes, ab initio, that the full impact of a project like TOKTEN does not only take
time to manifest, but is also difficult to measure accurately. Time, logistics, and availability of
appropriate data did not permit a more „scientific‟ measure of this during the review process. As
done in some other sections, therefore, we had to resort to anecdotal evidence in making our
assessment. The following quotes are taken directly from the questionnaires completed by the
Host Institutions and the TOKTEN Volunteers.

      Quotes from Host Institutions & TOKTEN Volunteers
      “During the Volunteer’s stay with us, he established the framework for a General
      Police Statistics Unit, the plans and strategies for the criminal justice statistics, and
      established a software system of criminal justice statistics. He trained about 300
      personnel, among them 54 new recruits with a statistical background. These personnel
      have taken up statistical positions in the states”.
      (Ministry of Interior, Khartoum)

      “He assisted us mainly in the areas of research, especially in statistical analysis. The
      personnel are mostly social researchers who badly need these skills, and they have
      been using the skills acquired especially in microfinance analysis”.
      (Directorate of Social and Cultural Affairs, Kassala)

                                                                                                     45
  December
           MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
  29, 2009


“About 20 personnel attended the training, some of them heads of units. From that
training we have been able to establish GIS to help us with development of radioactivity
ATLAS”.
(Sudan Atomic Energy Commission [SAEC], Khartoum)

“There has been a great improvement in the quality of our broadcasts. Our staff are
now more professional, and our coverage has increased”.
(Kassala Radio and TV Corporation, Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sports,
Kassala)

“There was the limitation of access to computers and internet at the judiciary during
that year...JOSS institution did not benefit much from the TOKTEN project”.
(Judiciary of Southern Sudan, Juba)

“The knowledge passed was substantial. It exceeded their [participants’] expectations.
Yes, we [now] know how to tackle poverty, budget, and proposals....”
(Ministry of Finance and National Planning, Khartoum)

“There were few staff in the Ministry, but they were enabled to carry out their
functions. A Strategic Plan for the Ministry has even been produced. We have also
produced an agricultural policy framework and a forestry policy framework. We had
few women in the Ministry with the appropriate training. Not a single woman was
Director or Assistant Director, now there are 40 women. The skills acquired have been
passed on”.
(Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Juba)

“It is too soon to tell, but a good foundation for subsequent training has been formed.
For the first time, we were able to use the SPSS [Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences] to analyse data”.
(Directorate of Social and Cultural Affairs, Kassala)

“Yes, there has been substantial improvement. We are at the stage of writing our final
report, and we are using the modelling taught by the Volunteer”
(UNESCO Chair for Water Resources, Omdurman University, Khartoum)

“As I said before, had it not been for TOKTEN, people (namely university professors)
would not have benefited... in research methodology; and 5 refereed academic journals
would not have seen the light of publication”.
(University of Science and Technology, Khartoum)




                                                                                           46
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

The Consultant observes that:
 The anecdotal evidence presented above serves as a pointer to the fact that TOKTEN
   assignments, by and large, have been of benefit to personnel, and they are bringing
   the knowledge and skills acquired to bear on their work – with a few exceptions.

     The impact on some institutions seems more obvious, immediate, and perhaps
      quantifiable (number of articles published in refereed journals; number and coverage
      of radio programmes, etc.) than on others.

     As has been observed earlier, the mechanism for monitoring impact still has to be
      further refined and properly applied by the Project Team. This is important for a final
      evaluation of the project.

     A rather unexpected impact of the project is that is has motivated two former
      volunteers, who are top professionals in their respective fields, to return home and
      take up appointments with government.



6.6      Sustainability

The review has shown that the gains of TOKTEN have the potential of being sustained to a
considerable extent. This, however, would seem to depend on a number of factors among which
are:

1. Getting Host Institutions to predicate their requests for TOKTEN Volunteers on a thorough
   needs analysis designed to benefit the greater number of personnel, especially those in key
   decision making positions or who perform functions that impact more significantly on the
   institution as a whole. Such analysis should be made within the context of available facilities.

2. Closely related to the above point is the need for selecting personnel of the right calibre who
   could benefit maximally from the training, and who have the capacity to pass on the
   knowledge and skills acquired to their colleagues.

3. Budgeting for volunteers‟ costs by the Host Institutions This is likely to engender greater
   commitment by the institutions to ensuring that the most benefits are derived from the
   transfer of knowledge and skills.

4. In addition to the above point, possible mainstreaming of the project on the government
   training plans (e.g. those of the Ministry of International Corporation, or Federal Steering
   Committee) might go a long way to sustain it, and to weave it into the plans of other
   institutions.




                                                                                                47
    December
             MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
    29, 2009

5. According greater recognition and support for the project within UNDP and the UN family as
   a whole. This might require mainstreaming it and facilitating greater synergy between
   TOKTEN and other programmes and projects with similar goals.
6. Soliciting private sector support for TOKTEN is likely to assure the sustainability of its
   gains. Apart from the fact that private organisations/institutions also stand to benefit directly
   from TOKTEN training, they may be in a position to provide more substantial support for it,
   perhaps through government institutions.




                                                                                                 48
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

7.       CONCLUSIONS, LESSONS LEARNT AND RECOMMENDATIONS


7.1      Conclusions

Based on the evaluation analysis presented earlier, the Consultant has reached the following
conclusions:

     TOKTEN is, indeed, very relevant to the human capacity development needs of Sudan, and
      is compatible with government policies in this respect, as well as UNDP‟s strategic
      framework of support to the country.

     The project provides a very cost-effective and efficient option for transferring valuable
      knowledge and skills to Sudanese institutions through expatriate nationals in the Diaspora.

     TOKTEN Volunteers recruited are highly qualified professionals with appreciable
      experience in their respective fields.

     Valuable knowledge and skills have been transferred in a number of cases, and these are
      being used and are already impacting positively on some beneficiary institutions. There are a
      few cases where the project has not succeeded in doing this.

     The amount of knowledge transferred (and ultimately used) is a function of the duration of
      training, capacity of the trainees themselves, quality of supportive facilities, opportunity to
      practise while training, and the complexity of the knowledge and skills involved, among
      other things.

     The project is still to establish strong links with relevant organisations in the Diaspora that
      could enlarge its pool of volunteers.

     The ToR for Volunteers has not always been detailed enough as to specify precisely what
      activities the Volunteer should engage in during the assignment.

     The project has fallen short of the number TOKTEN Volunteers to be recruited. With a target
      of 200, only 43 have been recruited so far.

     The number of personnel who have benefitted so far from TOKTEN assignments across the
      thematic Areas has far exceeded the 1000 initially targeted for training.

     Only half the number of states proposed to be covered by the project has so far been covered;
      and there have been a disproportionate number of assignments to Khartoum relative to the
      other areas.

     Some of the TOKTEN assignments, especially those that involve a great deal of practical
      exercises, would require more time than others.

                                                                                                  49
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009


     Some Host Institutions have not always met their obligation to provide an environment that
      could facilitate and maximise the transfer of knowledge.

     The project has suffered from an unstable management structure at least at the Area
      Coordination level. The full complement of staff has not been achieved, and programme
      support from UNDP regional offices in the other states does not appear reassuring so far.

     The Database and Advocacy mechanism of the project has much to achieve both within and
      outside the country. Much greater advocacy still has to be done, perhaps starting with UNDP
      itself.

     TOKTEN partnership links with government appears weak at the moment, and seems to be
      limited to getting government and related institutions to commit themselves only to providing
      “conducive environments” for training to take place.

     The M&E mechanism does not provide enough scope for a more active participation of
      stakeholders, especially in determining project impact. It is particularly weak in measuring
      project impact.

7.2      Lessons Learnt

The following are the main lessons learnt from the implementation of TOKTEN Sudan so far, as
perceived from this review.

Overall:

1. TOKTEN presents a very cost-effective and generally efficient way of transferring
   knowledge and skills acquired by Sudanese nationals in the Diaspora to their compatriots at
   home.

2. A rather unique feature of TOKTEN is that since Volunteers and trainees share the same
   linguistic and cultural background, greater empathy is forged that helps to facilitate the
   knowledge transfer. This gives the project an advantage over such other options as the use of
   „international experts‟.

3. TOKTEN provides an opportunity for reconnection between many Sudanese in the Diaspora
   and their home country. In a few cases encountered in this review, TOKTEN assignments
   have led to the decision by some Volunteers to finally return home.

4. While TOKTEN is demand-driven, Host Institutions may require some assistance with
   properly articulating their „demands‟. The TOKTEN Rwanda experience, which tends to
   blend „demand‟ and „supply‟ in recruiting and assigning volunteers, could serve as a good
   example.


                                                                                                50
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

5. The effectiveness and sustainability of a project like TOKTEN depends very much on intense
   and sustained advocacy, both locally and abroad, that should involve the broad spectrum of
   stakeholders. It is critical for full recognition to be demonstrated, first, by UNDP itself.

6. It is obvious that a robust and stable management structure is critical to the efficiency and
   effectiveness of programmes. Some of the problems of TOKTEN with not meeting certain
   targets are ascribable, at least in part, to the instability of this structure at the implementation
   level.

7.3     Recommendations

In the light of the above analysis and lessons learnt, the following recommendations are made:

7.3.1 Project management

16. UNDP support for TOKTEN should be strengthened. In particular, the full complement of
    project staff should be recruited, and the necessary resources made available. Mainstreaming
    TOKTEN and establishing greater synergy with other UN programmes sharing similar goals
    is an attractive option. This should provide an effective exit strategy for the project.

17. The tools for project cycle management should be reviewed with a view to facilitating the
    smooth running of the project and for improved institutional learning. This is particularly
    important because of the high turnover of staff at the implementation level. There should be a
    clear link between the project document, the assessment tools, various administrative tools,
    the activity plans (especially the ToR for Volunteers, and the tools for monitoring and
    evaluation).

18. The Project Team should play a more active role in all aspects of Host Institutions‟ TOKTEN
    activities (e.g. needs assessment, drawing up of ToR for assignments, selection of personnel
    for training, monitoring of activities during the assignment, and evaluation of outcomes).
    This should help to assure that the greatest benefit is derived from such assignments.

19. Related to the above, the TOKTEN Team should assure that the requisite facilities to support
    assignments exist in Host Institutions; and that the relevant personnel are selected for
    training.

20. TOKTEN assignment to thematic areas and locations should be prioritised. While
    recognising the demand-driven nature of the project, prioritising themes and locations, and
    perhaps sharing these with Volunteers may introduce the element of „supply drive‟ to
    complement the „demand drive‟ nature of the project. Prioritisation should be contextual, and
    based on the evolving political, economic, and socio-cultural realities of the country.

21. Special terms for some longer assignments (3-6 months), depending on the nature of
    activities to be undertaken, should be contrived, while taking care not to create „employment-
    like‟ conditions for the Volunteers. Such term may be attractive enough for some Volunteers
    to seek longer leave (e.g. sabbatical) from their employers where possible.
                                                                                                    51
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

7.3.2 Information and Advocacy

22. Advocacy for the project should be stepped up locally and internationally. In particular, the
    distribution of promotional materials locally, and overseas to strategically important
    organisations, should be enhanced substantially. This should serve to expand the database of
    Volunteers. Moreover, links with other relevant Sudanese organisations in the Diaspora (e.g.
    Secretariat of Sudanese Working Abroad) should be established.

23. The upgrading of the TOKTEN website should be expedited, and more advocacy materials
    developed.

24. Advocacy visits should be better planned, and should involve all relevant stakeholders. The
    Consultative Forum in each project location prescribed in the Project Document should be
    actualised. This should not be confused with the routine advocacy visits.

25. Advocacy letters and materials should be sent to all government ministries, universities and
    other institutions of higher learning, NGOs, the private sector, and other relevant national
    entities.

26. Official duty tours abroad for direct contact and discussions with potential partners,
    embassies, and members of the Diaspora should be made.

7.3.3 Monitoring and Evaluation

27. The M&E mechanism of the project should be revised to provide more precise information
    on project performance. In particular, the use of performance assessment workshops
    following the completion of assignments should be instituted. This mechanism should
    emphasise the active role of beneficiaries and other stakeholders (see recommendation on
    Consultative Forum above).

28. As the project draws to a close, data collection and management are of primary importance.
    All previous data and those to be collected should be properly organised and made accessible
    at all times.

7.3.4 Partnerships

29. Greater commitment to TOKTEN by key partners should be sought. Clear input for
    government and beneficiary institutions should be defined (e.g. budgeting for TOKTEN
    support; and appointing a National TOKTEN Project Coordinator to be based in the most
    appropriate Ministry and to work closely with the Project Team). Moreover, the more active
    participation of the Ministry of International Cooperation (GNU) and the Ministry of
    Regional Cooperation (GoSS) in project decision making should canvassed.

30. Partnership links with the private sector should be strengthened. Key private sector
    organisations should benefit from TOKTEN assignments, and be convinced to contribute to
    TOKTEN costs.
                                                                                              52
     December
              MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
     29, 2009

8.     DOCUMENTS REVIEWED

1.  Application Form for TOKTEN Volunteers
2.  Conditions of Service for the TOKTEN Volunteers
3.  Evaluation of TOKTEN Assignment: Evaluation by the Host Institution
4.  Evaluation of TOKTEN Assignment: Evaluation by the TOKTEN Volunteers
5.  Expatriates Join AIDS Fight (Newspaper Excerpt)
6.  Independent Assessment Report on the Preparatory Assistant (PA) Phase of
    TOKTEN Project, November 23, 2006
7. Joint Assessment Mission (JAM) Report (Vols. 1,2&3)
8. Selection Requirements for Volunteers
9. Terms of Reference for TOKTEN Mid-Term Review
10. TOKTEN Annual Progress Report: 1st January-31st December 2008
11. TOKTEN Assignment Final Report Forms
12. TOKTEN Mid-Year Report: January-June 2009-11-28 TOKTEN
13. TOKTEN Posts Implemented and Filled
14. TOKTEN Profile of Implemented Assignments: 2006-2009
15. TOKTEN Sudan Project Overview
16. Transfer of Knowledge Through Expatriate Nationals: How Does TOKTEN Work?
17. Transfer of Knowledge Through Expatriate Nationals: TOKTEN Opportunities
18. Transfer of Knowledge Through Expatriate Nationals: TOKTEN Project Document
19. UNDP Quarterly Bulletin Vol. 2
20. UNDP Sudan Country Programme Action Plan – 31 March 2009




                                                                             53
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009




                    ANNEXES




                                             54
    December
             MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
    29, 2009


       Annex 1: Terms of Reference for TOKTEN Mid-Term Review

                                          Background:

After the signing of historic Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in Sudan on 9 January
2005, the overall social and political environment have been changed and opened an
unprecedented window of opportunity to turn the devastation of years of war, displacement,
underdevelopment into a new era of peace and prosperity in Sudan. The dividends of peace and
prosperity in Sudan, however, cannot come automatically, but would rather depend on
capitalizing on the vast natural resource endowment and significant human capital of the country.
Similarly, the Joint Assessment Mission (JAM) framework focuses on key themes that are
integral to consolidating the peace and facilitating broad-based human and economic
development providing basic human security and human rights protection, and ensuring the safe
return and reintegration of the world‟s largest displaced population.

A large number of the qualified and experienced human resources of Sudan that could contribute
to recovery and development process in Sudan are living outside the country. Studies conducted
by different agencies on the expatriate Sudanese nationals in the diaspora have reported that a
rich pool of highly talented and experienced Sudanese nationals have been working around the
world and many of them are observing the present development in Sudan with great concern and
intend to extend a helping hand for reconstruction and peace building initiatives in their home
country. Fortunately, the Government of National Unity (GNU), and the Government of
Southern Sudan (GOSS) respectively have human resources capacity building policies that
encourage involvement of the Diaspora in their recovery and development efforts. The enabling
policy situation and the increasing political stability in Sudan form the major assumptions for the
continuation and expansion of the UNDP support on TOKTEN capacity building-oriented
project initiative.

UNDP Sudan is supporting the GNU and the GOSS in many fronts through its recovery and
development-support programmes, many of them with capacity building projects. TOKTEN
Project, with primary focus on capacity development through deployment of professional
Sudanese in the diaspora is another dimension of human resources and institutional capacity
building support to add value to other UNDP programmes all over Sudan, as well as contribution
to overall achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in the country.



                                                                                                 55
    December
             MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
    29, 2009

Since its inception in 2006 TOKTEN project has deployed 345 volunteer experts to 25
institutions in different parts of the Sudan, particularly Khartoum, Juba and Kassala. The project
has now reached mid-point in its life and the project board resolved to conduct a project
evaluation in order to assess the impact of volunteer assignments, assess lessons learnt and
consider recommendations for strengthening and fine-tuning project implementation and
delivery.

Evaluation Purposes
As mentioned earlier the TOKTEN project has been operational since 2006 and has indeed
reached the mid-point in its life cycle. UNDP wants to take close look at how the project has
evolved and the contribution it has been making to the overall capacity development in the
benefiting institutions. The purpose of the evaluation is, therefore, to assess the effectiveness of
the TOKTEN approach to capacity development in Sudanese institutions.

Scope and Objectives

The primary objective of the evaluation is to examine all and strengthen the processes leading to
proper transfer of knowledge with the aim of increasing the project‟s contribution toward
capacity development of the Sudanese institutions. The evaluation will assess project‟s
contributions to development results in Sudan, drawing lessons learned and outlining options for
improvements.

The evaluation will specifically:

      Assess progress made by the project towards achieving set results;
      Determine whether or not useful knowledge has been transferred to Sudanese institutions.
      To determine whether that knowledge has been appropriately used
      To gauge the impact resulting from the use of that knowledge in the benefiting
       institutions.
      Examine the quality and relevance of the staff selected for the knowledge transfer; and
      Draw up and document any lessons learnt from this experience including identifying
       factors that might have prevented the project from achieving the desired objectives

                                 Description of Responsibilities :
The scope of the evaluation will cover the wide range of the project‟s activities starting from the
selection process of volunteers to actual transfer of knowledge within the institution supported.
These include, but not limited to the following:

      Identifying the need for TOKTEN support within the host institution

                                                                                                   56
    December
             MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
    29, 2009

      Developing the appropriate terms of reference for the TOKTEN volunteer assignment
      Selecting the right candidate from the pool of available experts in the required thematic
       area
      Implementation of the terms of reference and the accompanying knowledge transfer plan
       which the volunteer develops prior or at arrival to the institutions.
      Analyze the working environment for the volunteer to determine whether it is conducive
       for the transfer of knowledge including available facilities and the staff to whom to
       transfer the knowledge
      The duration of assignments
      Monitoring the use of knowledge in the benefiting institutions
      Availability of capacity development plans within the benefiting institutions

The evaluation will cover the geographical areas/regions to which many TOKTEN volunteers
were assigned. Khartoum, Juba and Kassala in particular.

 Evaluation Questions
The evaluation consultant should be in a position to elaborate questions based on the purpose and
objectives mentioned in the preceding section of these terms of reference. However, the key
questions should include the following:

      Was there knowledge transfer?
      Was it useful and indeed put to use?
      What impact did it make on the institution in the thematic area concerned?
      What improvements could be made on the different processes?
      What are the issues and challenges facing the project and what are the possible solutions?

Methodology

Based on the objectives mentioned above, the consultant will propose a methodology and plan
for this assignment. The methodology will be finalized in consultation the GOV&RoL unit and
the project team. Nonetheless, a review of the project documents and reports must be conducted.
Meeting with all the project stakeholders particularly the benefiting institutions cannot be over
emphasized.

Data gathering techniques will include: desk reviews, stakeholder meetings, client surveys, and
focus group interviews and selected site visits. The evaluation consultant will use triangulation of
perceptions, documents and validations and will review documents, such as the record of the
roundtable meetings and policies and action plans, as well as programming frameworks
(UNDAF, Country Assessment, CCF, Strategic Result Framework/ Results-oriented Annual



                                                                                                 57
    December
             MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
    29, 2009

Report, etc.), which gives an overall picture of the country context.

Desk review of existing documents and materials such as support documents, evaluations,
assessments, and a variety of temporal and focused reports will be conducted. In particular it will
review mission, programme/project reports, the annual reports and the consultant‟s technical
assessment reports.

A stakeholder involvement and consultation process is envisaged. The evaluation consultant will
meet with government ministries/agencies, other institutions, civil society organizations, NGOs,
private sector representatives, UN agencies, multilateral and bilateral donors, and beneficiaries.

Field visits to selected sites; and briefing and debriefing sessions with UNDP and project Board
and the Government, as well as with donors and partners

Evaluation Products (Deliverables)

The evaluation consultant should be accountable to producing, at a minimum, the following
documents:
Evaluation inception report. An inception report should detail the evaluators understanding of
what is being evaluated and why, showing how each evaluation question will be answered by
way of:

      proposed methods,
      proposed sources of data,
      data collection procedures.

The inception report should include a proposed schedule of tasks/activities and deliverables,
designating a team member with the lead responsibility for each task or product. The inception
report provides the programme unit and the evaluators with an opportunity to verify that they
share the same understanding about the evaluation and clarify any misunderstanding at the
outset.

Draft evaluations report: The consultant will provide draft report for review by the programme
unit and the key stakeholders. Consolidated comments will be provided to the consultant by the
task manager.
Final evaluation report: The final report incorporates the inputs resulting from the review of the
draft report. See annex 1 for the report structure and minimum requirements.


                                                                                                 58
    December
             MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
    29, 2009

Briefing and debriefing sessions with UNDP and project Board and the Government, as well as
with donors and partners
                                        Competencies :
The evaluation will be conducted by an individual consultant, who should fulfil the following
requirements, at a minimum:

      Advanced degree, in the relevant field i.e. management, development studies or related
       field.
      Solid academic/research records/ publications on development work.
      Previous experience in conducting project/programme evaluations is an asset
      Knowledge of the political, cultural and economic situation in Sudan or ability to quickly
       acquire such knowledge is desirable

                                      Qualifications :
Extensive experience in evaluation development programme/projects

      Ability to communicate in English and Arabic
      Strong analytical and writing skills, presentation and interpersonal skills
      Proven ability to write analytical reports
      Ability to meet tight deadlines

Evaluation Ethics:

This Evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the Ethical
Guidelines for Evaluation (UNEG 2007) annex 2 and the consultant must use measures to ensure
compliance with the evaluator code of conduct (e.g. measures to safeguard the rights and
confidentiality of their sources, provisions to collect and report data …..etc)

Management Arrangements

Evaluation as an activity within project management falls directly under the responsibility of the
Project Manager who will follow-up to ensure that the process is being conducted as per the
agreed plan. The Project Manager will be the task manager; ensure all relevant documents are
shared with the consultant before the start of the evaluation. The task manager in collaboration
with project team will facilitate travel, provide administrative and logistical support and facilitate
security related issues of the consultancy.

The consultant will be expected to use own laptop computer. The senior programme officer will
support the project manager and the evaluator as regards the quality assurance aspects of the
evaluation. He will also provide all the information required by the evaluator in relation to wider
UNDP programme to which the project relates.
The consultant will ensure that she/he has access to the appropriate information and indeed meets
the key stakeholders. The consultant should make sure to meet the M&E staff of MSU to further
                                                                                                   59
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

acquaint themselves with all the UNDP regulations relating to evaluation.

The consultant will be required to make power point presentation of the draft evaluation report
for discussion by the programme section of UNDP.

Timeframe for the Evaluation Process

The estimated time for conducting this evaluation is four weeks starting from October, 2009. A
tentative time table is outlined below that could be amended in consultation with GOV & RoL
unit.

Item Days
Review of documents and consultations with UNDP, key stakeholders : 7
Inception report : 5
Field visits – benefiting institutions (Northern and Southern Sudan) : 10
Analysis of the information collected and preparation of a draft report : 7
Debriefing to the project stakeholders (presenting the draft report) : 1
Incorporating the comments and submission of final report : 3
Total work days : 33




                                                                                                  60
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009


                     Annex 2: TOKTEN Sudan Project Team

                    Name                                          Designation
   1. John Ajawin                                 Senior Program Officer
   2. Mohamed Elsayed Ali                         Project Manager
   3. Howida Elrasheed                            Advocacy & Database Associate
   4. Elnour ElKhalifa                            Area Coordinator - North
Note: The positions of Area Coordinator and Project Assistant – South, as well as Operations
Assistant and Project Assistant – Khartoum were vacant at the time of the review. The Project
Manager has also just taken up a position in another project.




                                                                                                61
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

                                Annex 3: Evaluation Issues/Questions Pursued

           Question/Issue                    Type of data          Possible source(s) of          Responsible person(s)
                                                                             data
1. How are the needs of host            Quantitative,            TOKTEN Team;                     Consultant/TOKTEN
   institutions for TOKTEN support      qualitative (secondary, Benefiting Institutions;          Project Team
   identified?                          primary)                 relevant government
                                                                 depts./units; civil society
                                                                 organizations; other
                                                                 relevant stakeholders
2. How are the Terms of Reference for   Qualitative (primary,    TOKTEN Team;                     Consultant/TOKTEN
   TOKTEN volunteer assignments         secondary)               Benefiting Institutions;         Project Team
   developed?                                                    relevant government
                                                                 depts./units; civil society
                                                                 organizations; other
                                                                 relevant stakeholders
3. What is the selection process for    Qualitative (secondary) TOKTEN Team;                      Consultant/TOKTEN
   TOKTEN volunteers?                                            Benefiting Institutions;         Project Team
                                                                 relevant government
                                                                 depts./units; civil society
                                                                 organizations; other
                                                                 relevant stakeholders
4. What is the status of the TOKTEN     Qualitative/quantitative TOKTEN Team                      Consultant/TOKTEN
   database from which experts may      (secondary)                                               Project Team
   be selected?
5. What is the profile of the TOKTEN    Quantitative/qualitative   TOKTEN Team; TOKTEN            Consultant/TOKTEN
   volunteers that have so far been     (primary, secondary)       volunteers; Benefiting         Project Team
   involved in the project? Nos.,                                  Institutions; relevant
   qualifications, experience, etc.                                government depts./units;
                                                                   civil society organizations;
                                                                   other relevant
                                                                   stakeholders

                                                                                                                      62
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

6. Who have been the beneficiaries of     Quantitative/qualitative   TOKTEN Team; TOKTEN            Consultant/TOKTEN
   the TOKTEN support (profile of         (primary, secondary)       volunteers; Benefiting         Project Team
   institutions/staff who have received                              Institutions; relevant
   support)?                                                         government depts./units;
                                                                     civil society organizations;
                                                                     other relevant
                                                                     stakeholders
7. To what extent do benefiting           Qualitative                TOKTEN Team;                   Consultant/TOKTEN
   institutions have capacity                                        Benefiting Institutions;       Project Team
   development plans that are in                                     relevant government
   consonance with TOKTEN support?                                   depts./units; civil society
                                                                     organizations; other
                                                                     relevant stakeholders
8. How are the thematic areas for         Qualitative                TOKTEN Team;                   Consultant/TOKTEN
   support identified?                                               Benefiting Institutions;       Project Team
                                                                     relevant government
                                                                     depts./units; civil society
                                                                     organizations; other
                                                                     relevant stakeholders
9. What precise knowledge, skills and     Qualitative/quantitative   TOKTEN Team;                   Consultant/TOKTEN
    competencies (KSC) have been                                     Benefiting Institutions and    Project Team
    passed on so far? To how many                                    staff; relevant government
    beneficiaries? (probe into                                       depts./units; other relevant
    processes/procedures of the                                      stakeholders
    transfer)
10. How appropriate, substantial and      Qualitative (mainly        TOKTEN Team;                   Consultant/TOKTEN
    useful have these knowledge, skills   primary)                   Benefiting Institutions and    Project Team
    and competencies been?                                           staff; relevant government
                                                                     depts./units; other relevant
                                                                     stakeholders
11. What more could have been passed Qualitative (mainly             TOKTEN Team;                   Consultant/TOKTEN
    on that was not? Why?            primary)                        Benefiting Institutions and    Project Team

                                                                                                                        63
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

                                                                  staff; relevant government
                                                                  depts./units; other relevant
                                                                  stakeholders
12. Could these knowledge, skills,         Qualitative (mainly    Benefiting Institutions and    Consultant/TOKTEN
    competencies be sustained after        primary)               staff, TOKTEN Volunteers,      Project Team
    the support? Could they be built                              TOKTEN Team, other
    upon? How?                                                    relevant stakeholders
13. What has been the perceived            Qualitative (Mainly    Benefiting Institutions and    Consultant/TOKTEN
    impact on individuals and              primary)               staff; TOKTEN Volunteers;      Project Team
    institutions from the use of the                              TOKTEN Team; other
    acquired knowledge, skills and                                relevant stakeholders
    competencies?
14. How is quality assured in the total    Qualitative (primary   TOKTEN Team; TOKTEN            Consultant/TOKTEN
    transfer process?                      and secondary)         Volunteers; Benefiting         Project Team
                                                                  Institutions
15. How are the „benefits‟ of the          Qualitative (primary   TOKTEN Team; TOKTEN            Consultant/TOKTEN
    transfer monitored? (related to 14     and secondary)         Volunteers; Benefiting         Project Team
    above)                                                        Institutions
16. What precise constraints do            Qualitative (primary   TOKTEN Volunteers;             Consultant/TOKTEN
    TOKTEN volunteers themselves           and secondary)         TOKTEN Team;                   Project Team
    identify as impinging on the                                  Benefiting Institutions
    effective and efficient transfer of
    KSC?
17. What do beneficiaries/stakeholders     Qualitative (primary   TOKTEN Team;                   Consultant/TOKTEN
    identify as constraints?               and secondary)         Benefiting Institutions        Project Team
18. How do TOKTEN volunteers assess        Qualitative (primary   TOKTEN Volunteers;             Consultant/TOKTEN
    the quality of the physical,           and secondary)         TOKTEN Team                    Project Team
    emotional, and social environment,
    including infrastructure, to support
    their work?
19. How effective do the TOKTEN            Qualitative (primary   TOKTEN Volunteers;             Consultant/TOKTEN
    volunteers think they have             and secondary)         TOKTEN Team                    Project Team

                                                                                                                     64
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

    performed their roles?
20. What gains have been made in           Qualitative/qualitative    TOKTEN Team;                   Consultant/TOKTEN
    TOKTEN from the Preparatory            (primary and               Benefiting Institutions        Project Team
    Assistance Phase to the present?       secondary)
21. How far have the goals of TOKTEN       Qualitative/qualitative    TOKTEN Team                    Consultant/TOKTEN
    been realised?                         (primary and                                              Project Team
                                           secondary)
22. How effective and efficient have the   Qualitative/qualitative    TOKTEN Team; TOKTEN            Consultant/TOKTEN
    management, monitoring and             (primary and               Volunteers; Benefiting         Project Team
    evaluation of TOKTEN been?             secondary)                 Institutions
23. What significant lessons have been     Qualitative (primary       TOKTEN Team; TOKTEN            Consultant/TOKTEN
    learned from the TOKTEN project?       and secondary)             Volunteers; Benefiting         Project Team
                                                                      Institutions
24. How could the different processes      Qualitative (primary       TOKTEN Team; TOKTEN            Consultant/TOKTEN
    of the project be improved?            and secondary)             Volunteers; Benefiting         Project Team
                                                                      Institutions; other relevant
                                                                      stakeholders
25. What are the major issues and          Qualitative/quantitative   TOKTEN Team; TOKTEN            Consultant/TOKTEN
    challenges facing the project, and                                Volunteers; Benefiting         Project Team
    how best could these be resolved?                                 Institutions; other relevant
                                                                      stakeholders
26. Have there been unexpected             Qualitative                TOKTEN Team; TOKTEN            Consultant/TOKTEN
    positive outcomes of the project?                                 Volunteers; Benefiting         Project Team
    What are they?                                                    Institutions; other relevant
                                                                      stakeholders
27. Have there been unexpected             Qualitative                TOKTEN Team; TOKTEN            Consultant/TOKTEN
    negative outcomes of the project?                                 Volunteers; Benefiting         Project Team
    What are they?                                                    Institutions; other relevant
                                                                      stakeholders




                                                                                                                         65
       December
                MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
       29, 2009


                                          Annex 4: Evaluation Instruments
   1. Template for documenting TOKTEN Assignments according to Thematic Areas: 2006-2009

  Thematic Areas                                      Volunteers Assigned                                 Total for
                              2006                 2007                2008                    2009       Thematic
                          M     F     T      M      F     T      M      F          T       M    F     T     Area
Governance and Rule of
Law
Gender in Development


Sustainable Natural
Resource and
Environmental
Conservation and
Management
Business and
Sustainable Livelihood
and Development

Agriculture, Food
Security, and Rural
Development
Health

Education, Training and
Research

TOTAL PER YEAR




                                                                                                               66
     December
              MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
     29, 2009

2.     Interview Questionnaire for Host Institutions

            INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR HOST INSTITUTIONS

Name of Host Institution

Name of Contact Person/Person Interviewed

Tel. No.

E-mail address

Name(s) of TOKTEN Volunteers


Duration of Assignment(s)


A.     General Information

1. How did you get to know about the TOKTEN project?


2. Does your institution have human capacity development plans? If so, how does TOKTEN fit
   into these?


3. What main activities does the TOKTEN Volunteer undertake during his/her assignment?


4. Were these activities within the priority needs of your institution?


5. How would you rate the TOKTEN Volunteer‟s expertise? (Excellent? Good? Average?)


6. How would you rate the amount of knowledge and skills passed on by the Volunteer?
   (Substantial? Adequate? Minimal?)

.
7. How useful would you say the knowledge and skills have been for your personnel? (Very
   useful? Somewhat useful? Not so useful?)



                                                                                           67
     December
              MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
     29, 2009


B.     Benefiting Personnel

1. How many of your personnel have benefited from the TOKTEN volunteer‟s training?


2. What is the level/profile of these personnel?


3. Are these the personnel who need the training most? If yes, why?


4. Are there others who could have benefited from the training but could not take part in it? If
   yes, why?


5. Have you noticed any improvement in the performance of your personnel since receiving the
   training?


6. If you have, how would you rate this improvement? (Substantial? Adequate? Minimal?)


7. Have personnel who have benefited from the training been able to pass on the knowledge and
   skills acquired to their colleagues?


8. Has there been a noticeable impact on your institution as a whole as a result of the training
   activities? If yes, in what form?


9. Are these knowledge and skills acquired by your personnel likely to be sustained after the
   Volunteer has left?


10. How would you rate the working relationship between the TOKTEN Volunteer and his/her
    counterparts? (Excellent? Good? Fair?)


C.     TOKTEN Processes

1. Do you think the TOKTEN Volunteer sent to you was the most suitable?


2. Did you participate in the selection process of the Volunteer? If yes, how?


                                                                                                   68
    December
             MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
    29, 2009


3. If no, would you have liked to participate in the selection process? How?


4. On the average, how much would it cost your institution to support a staff for a 4-week
   training in the same aspects abroad (flight tickets, course fees, board and lodging, etc.)?


5. Was your institution part of the monitoring and evaluation of the Volunteer? If so, how?


6. Are you satisfied with the monitoring and evaluation of the assignment? If no, why?


7. Do you plan to keep in touch with the Volunteer after the assignment?


8. Would your institution like to engage another Volunteer in the near future?


9. If yes, in what precise area(s) of need?


10. What was it good that happened during this assignment that you did not anticipate?


11. What was it that happened that was not so good, but which you did not anticipate?


12. What would you identify as the greatest constrain to the effectiveness of this assignment?


13. What was it that you would have liked to happen but which did not happen?


14. What is it you would like most to have changed in the overall TOKTEN Project, as far as you
    understand it?




                                                                                                 69
     December
              MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
     29, 2009


D.     Level of Satisfaction with TOKTEN Experience

Please indicate your level of satisfaction with the following specific aspects of TOKTEN support
to your institution (select only one response for each item)




                                                                                        Dissatisfied



                                                                                                       Dissatisfied


                                                                                                                      Applicable
                                                                            Satisfied
                                                                Satisfied
                                                                Very




                                                                                                       Very


                                                                                                                      Not
                                                                  4              3             2          1           N/A
1. The process of determining the area of support by
    TOKTEN to your institution.
2. The process of identification of the TOKTEN Volunteer.
3. Selection process of the TOKTEN Volunteer.
4. Technical preparation and planning of the TOKTEN
    assignment.
5. Technical expertise displayed and applied by the
    TOKTEN Volunteer during the assignment.
6. Quality of service delivered by the TOKTEN Volunteer
    during the assignment.
7. Duration of the TOKTEN assignment.
8. Level of motivation by the TOKTEN Volunteer during the
    assignment.
9. Extent of contribution of TOKTEN Volunteer to capacity
    development of staff and institution toward the realization
    of your institution‟s objectives.
10. Support by the TOKTEN Volunteer in establishing
    networks with professionals and other relevant bodies
    outside of Sudan.
11. Work relationship of TOKTEN Volunteer with
    counterparts during the assignment.
12. Overall relevance of TOKTEN to human and institutional
    capacity building towards the development of the country.
13. Support given by the TOKTEN Project Team during the
    assignment.
14. Extent and quality of resources and time committed to the
    TOKTEN assignment by your institution
(Adapted from the UNDP-designed Host Institutions’ Evaluation of TOKTEN Assignment Form)




                                                                                                                      70
    December
             MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
    29, 2009


15. If your response to any of the items above is 1 (Very Dissatisfied) or 2 (Dissatisfied), please
   explain:
Question No.                                         Reasons




16. Do you have any suggestions on how to improve the TOKTEN Project in Sudan?




                               THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME




                                                                                                 71
     December
              MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
     29, 2009


3.     Focus Group Discussion Guide for Beneficiary Staff of Host Institutions

     FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION GUIDE FOR BENEFICIARY STAFF IN

Name of Host Institution

Names of Beneficiary Staff Discussed With




Tel. No.

E-mail address

Name(s) of TOKTEN Volunteer(s)


Duration of Assignment(s)

                                  HOST INSTITUTIONS

A.     General Information

8. How did you get selected to participate in the TOKTEN training project?


9. Does your institution have other human capacity development activities in which you
   participate? If so, how does TOKTEN fit into these?


10. What main activities did the TOKTEN Volunteer undertake during his/her assignment?


11. Were these activities appropriate to your training needs and those of your institution?


12. How would you rate the TOKTEN Volunteer‟s expertise? (Excellent? Good? Average?)



                                                                                              72
    December
             MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
    29, 2009

13. How would you rate the amount of knowledge and skills passed on to you by the Volunteer?
    (Substantial? Adequate? Minimal?)

.
14. How useful have these knowledge and skills been to you in your work? (Very useful?
    Somewhat useful? Not so useful?)


15. What were the main methods used by the Volunteer in passing on these knowledge and skills
    to you?


16. How would you rate these methods from the perspective of your own ability? (Very
    appropriate? Somewhat appropriate? Not appropriate?)


17. Which other methods would you have liked the Volunteer to use which were not used? Why?


18. Did your institution have the right facilities to support the knowledge and skills transfer?


19. If no, how did you and the Volunteer get around this?


20. What more did you wish to learn which you did not? Why?


21. Were there others who could have benefited from the training but could not take part in it? If
    yes, why?



22. Have you been able to use the knowledge and skill gained in your everyday work? If yes,
    how has this improved your performance? (Substantially? Adequately? Minimally?)



23. If no, why have you not been able to them?



24. Have you been able to pass on these knowledge and skills to your colleagues? How?


25. If you have not been able to pass on these knowledge and skills to your colleagues, why?
                                                                                                   73
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009



26. Now that the Volunteer is gone, do you think you will be able to sustain and improve on
    what you learnt?


27. What more training do you require?



28. Would you like the same Volunteer to come again, or would you like another to come? Why?


29. Are you in touch with the last Volunteer?


30. How would you rate the duration of assignment of the Volunteer? (Long enough? Adequate?
    Short? Too short?)

31. If you consider the TOKTEN assignment short or too short, how long would you have liked
    it to be?


32. How would you describe the relationship between the Volunteer and staff in your institution
    during the assignment?


33. What was it that you liked most about the TOKTEN assignment?


34. What was it about the assignment that you did not like?


35. What was it that you wished had happened during the assignment that did not happen?


36. What was the good thing that happened during the assignment that you did not expect to
    happen?


37. What was the bad thing that happened during the assignment that you did not expect to
    happen?


38. What do you think was the greatest constraint to the assignment?
                                                                                              74
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009



39. What suggestions do you have for the improvement of the TOKTEN Project?




                            THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME




                                                                              75
     December
              MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
     29, 2009


4.     Questions for UNDP TOKTEN Team

                    QUESTIONS FOR UNDP TOKTEN TEAM

       Names of Staff                    Designation                   E-mail Address




A.     Programme Relevance and Appropriateness

1. How relevant do you consider TOKTEN to be to the prevailing situation in Sudan?

2. Are there Government policies for human resource capacity building to which TOKTEN
   relates either directly or indirectly?

3. In what ways can TOKTEN contribute to Sudan‟s achievement of the MDGs? Which ones
   specifically?

4. To what extent is the design and implementation of TOKTEN within the mandate of UNDP
   Sudan? How is it within the framework of strategic support of UNDP Sudan?

5. To what extent is TOKTEN relevant and appropriate to the support needs of the host
   institutions? How are these support needs identified?

6. What informed the identification of the Thematic Areas of TOKTEN support?

7. Are the Terms of Reference of TOKTEN Volunteers actually designed to address the needs
   of host institutions?

B.     Programme Efficiency

1. Does TOKTEN provide a more cost-effective means of capacity building than other options?
   How does the cost of recruiting and maintaining a TOKTEN Volunteer for 4 weeks compare
   to sending a Sudanese staff abroad for the same length of training?

2. Are the least possible resources used to achieve the required quality of outputs/outcomes of
   the programme?


                                                                                            76
     December
              MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
     29, 2009

3. Are the right candidates from the pool of available experts in the required thematic areas
   actually selected?

4. What is the status of the TOKTEN Sudan website?

5. What is the size and quality of the TOKTEN expert pool?

6. Has TOKTEN succeeded in establishing networks of Sudanese experts in the Diaspora?

7. If yes, in what ways is the project utilising such networks?

8. What is the pattern of assignments to the thematic areas? Are they all appropriately sampled?
   If not, why?

9. What is the pattern of demand requests from the different regions? If there are wide
   variations, what are the possible reasons for this?

10. Does the duration of TOKTEN assignments make for meaningful knowledge and skills
    transfer?

11. Is the work environment in the host institutions appropriate for efficient knowledge and skills
    transfer?

12. What is the management structure of the TOKTEN Project (including Monitoring and
    Evaluation)?

13. What, if any, are the constraints to efficiency of this structure?

14. What are the general constraints to efficiency of the TOKTEN Project?

C.     Programme Effectiveness

1. What progress has the programme made so far in achieving set goals?

2. Has useful knowledge and skills actually been transferred to Sudanese institutions?

3. Are these knowledge and skills relevant to the needs of the benefiting institutions?

4. Are the Terms of Reference and Pre-Assignment Transfer Plans of TOKTEN Volunteers
   generally implemented? If there are exceptions, what are the reasons for this?

5. What are the general constraints to effectiveness of the project?




                                                                                                77
     December
              MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
     29, 2009

D.     Programme Impact

1. Have TOKTEN beneficiaries been using the knowledge and skills gained from Volunteers in
   their work? Does UNDP monitor this?

2. Are there indications that the quality of work in the beneficiary institutions has improved?

3. Are there overt impacts on Sudanese society that are attributable to the TOKTEN Project?

E.     Sustainability

1. Are there indications that the gains of TOKTEN can be sustained by the benefiting
   institutions?

2. If donor support were to end now, can TOKTEN be sustained by Government?

3. What could be done to enhance the sustainability of the project?

F.     Lessons Learnt and Recommendations

1. From the perspective of UNDP, what are the major lessons that have been learnt from the
   project?

2. Overall, what have been the greatest constraints to the implementation of TOKTEN project?

3. What is it that could have been done differently?

4. What could be done now to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the project?

5. What have been the unexpected positive outcomes of the project?

6. Have there been unexpected negative outcomes of the project? If so, what are these?

G.     General Comments

Are there any comments, observations, elaborations, or clarifications you wish to make?




                              THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME
                                                                                                  78
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009


                         Annex 5: Review Work Plan


    Date                               Activity                          No. of days
25 Nov       Consultant arrives Khartoum                                      1
26 Nov.      Initial consultations with TOKTEN Team                           1
27-30 Nov.   Review of documents                                              4
1-4 Dec.     Consultations with UNDP & preparation of Inception               4
             Report
5 Dec.       Inception Report submitted                                      1
6-8 Dec. &   Visits to and interviews with key stakeholders in               4
17 Dec.      Khartoum
9-12 Dec.    Visits to and interviews with key stakeholders in Juba          4
13-16 Dec.   Visits to and interviews with key stakeholders in Kassala       4
17-23 Dec.   Analysis of information collected and preparation of            7
             Draft Report
24 Dec.      Debriefing to the project stakeholders (presentation of         1
             Draft Report)
27-29 Dec.   Incorporating the comments and submission of Final              3
             Report




                                                                                       79
     December
              MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
     29, 2009

                                                    Annex 6: Schedule of Visits
Suggestion dates for the visits:
* Based on official Vacation days:
Juba:                            Saturday, Sunday
Khartoum and Kassala:            Friday, Saturday

                                   Location                  From                        To
                             Khartoum (4 Days)        Sunday 6/12         Tuesday 8/12 AND Thursday 17/12
                             Juba      (4 Days)       Wednesday 9/12      Saturday 12/12
                             Kassala   (4 Days)       Sunday 13/12        Wednesday 16/12


No Institution                              Volunteer         Assignment Location           Contact Person   Proposed Date
                                                                                                             of Visit
                                                             Khartoum
1.                                          Maison Dahab                                    Osman Elmahal,   Sunday 6/12
                                                                                            Elfatih Malik
2.                                          Ahmed Nassr                                     Mona             Sunday 6/12

3.                                          Siddig Muneer                                   Nawal            Sunday 6/12

4.                                                                                          Ehsan            Monday 7/12

5.                                                                                          Muhsin           Monday 7/12
6.                                          Emad                                            Essam, Waleed    Tuesday 8/12
                                            AbuGessisa
7.                                          Tillal Eldabi                                   Suliman, Mona    Tuesday 8/12
8.   Ministry of Interior                   Mohd Elamin                                     Magdi moharam    Thursday 17/12
                                            Elbushra
9.                                          Mohammed                                        BadreLDIN        Thursday 17/12

                                                                                                                              80
      December
               MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
      29, 2009

                                                    Elmoiez Malik

10.                                                                                                       Mohamed elHAIFZ   Thursday 17/12

                                                                    Kassala
11.   Kassala Locality, Directorate of Social and   Samar Galal     TOKTEN Advisor on Research            Maria             Monday 14/12
      Cultural Affairs                                              Methodology, Survey Design and Data
                                                                    Collection and Analysis
12.                                                 Taha Elhag                                                              Monday 14/12

13.                                                 Mohammed                                                                Tuesday 15/12
                                                    Khalid
14.                                                 Siddig Muneer                                         Musa Oshiek,      Tuesday 15/12


                                                                      Juba
15.                                                 Scopas Dima                                                             Thursday 10/12

16.                                                 Godfrey Ladu                                                            Thursday 10/12
17.                                                                                                                         Friday 11/12




                                                                                                                                             81
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

                       Annex 7: List of People Interviewed

                      Name                        Designation/Institution
1. Abdel Aziz Ahmed ElKhidir                Social and Cultural Affairs Officer,
                                            Directorate of Social and Cultural Affairs,
                                            Kassala
2. AlAme Ib M. Amer                         Director General, Kassala Radio &
                                            Television Cooperation, Ministry of
                                            Culture, Youth and Sports, Kassala
3. Beatrice Khamisa Wani                    Director General for Multilateral
                                            Relations, Ministry of Regional
                                            Cooperation, Government of Southern
                                            Sudan, Juba
4. Bushra Musa Eisa                         Social and Cultural Affairs Officer,
                                            Directorate of Social and Cultural Affairs,
                                            Kassala
5. Fred Yiga                                Senior Advisor to GoSS Minister for
                                            Internal Affairs & Inspector General of
                                            Police, GoSS, Juba
6. Gafer Zaidan Osman Elnour                Development Assistant, General
                                            Directorate of Economic Planning &
                                            Development, Kassala
7. Gregg Bekko                              Support to Judiciary Project Manager
                                            (UNDP-Sudan), GoSS, Juba
8. Hafiz Fathi Ahmed                        News Manager, Kassala Radio &
                                            Television Cooperation, Ministry of
                                            Culture, Youth and Sports, Kassala
9. Hassan Mohamed Isalasall                 General Manager, Kassala Radio &
                                            Television Cooperation, Ministry of
                                            Culture, Youth and Sports, Kassala
10. Hon. Peter Gatkouth Kor                 Chief Registrar & Under-Secretary,
                                            Ministry of Legal Affairs & Constitutional
                                            Development, Government of Southern
                                            Sudan, Juba
11. Jamah M. Elamin                         Representative of the Ministry of
                                            Agriculture, Kassala
12. Marie Elkhidir                          Director, Directorate of Social and
                                            Cultural Affairs, Kassala
13. Mawahib Mohamed Ahmed                   Ministry of Social Welfare and Child
                                            Affairs, Government of Sudan, Khartoum
14. Mawia Adam Mohamed                      Planning Officer, General Directorate of
                                            Economic Planning & Development,
                                            Kassala
15. Mohamed Elamin Abdullah                 Social and Cultural Affairs Officer,

                                                                                    82
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

                                    Directorate of Social and Cultural Affairs,
                                    Kassala
16. Monira Basheer Mohamed Saloeh   Health Promotion Manager, Federal
                                    Ministry of Health, Communicable
                                    Diseases Control Directorate, Kassala
17. Muna Mohammed Musnad            Director, UNESCO Chair in Water
                                    Resources, Omdurman University
                                    Khartoum
18. Nawal Mohamed Alfki             Ministry of Social Welfare and Child
                                    Affairs, Government of Sudan, Khartoum
19. Prof. Scopas Jibi Dima          Projects Coordinator & Advisor,
                                    Agricultural Development, Ministry of
                                    Agriculture & Forestry, Government of
                                    Southern Sudan, Juba
20. Sit Aldar Ahmed Ali             Nutrition Director, Federal Ministry of
                                    Health, Communicable Diseases Control
                                    Directorate, Kassala
21. Stephen Juma Wani               Programme Officer (UNDP-Sudan),
                                    Ministry of Legal Affairs & Constitutional
                                    Development, Government of Southern
                                    Sudan, Juba
22. Yasin Eisa Mohamed              Director, UN Agencies, Ministry of`
                                    International Cooperation, Khartoum




                                                                            83
 December
          MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
 29, 2009

      Annex 8: Meeting the MDGs in Sudan – Selected Challenges
(1999/2000         unless    indicated) 2015 Target        South                  2015 Target
North
MDG 1: Poverty and Hunger
Estimated poverty incidence (% of 50-90%            25-45%         90%               45%
total population)
Prevalence      child   malnutrition 35%            16%            48% *             24%
(underwt for age; % under 5)
Prevalence acute child malnutrition 16%             8%             21%               11%
(underwt for height;
% under 5)
MDG 2: Education
Gross primary enrolment ratio        62%            100%           20% ‡             100%
Percentage of cohort reaching 66%                   100%           28% §             100%
grade 5
Youth literacy rate (% ages 15-24) 78%              100%           31% ‡             100%
MDG3: Gender Equality
Ratio girls to boys in primary 88%                  100%           36%               100%
education* (%)
Ratio literate females to males (% 84%              100%           35%               100%
ages 15-24)
Seats in parliament (South, 10%†                    -              18%+              -
National Liberation Council) held
by women (%)
MDG4: Child Mortality
Under-5 mortality rate (per 1,000) 104              35             250 *             83
Infant mortality rate (per 1,000 68                 -              150               -
live births)
One-yr-olds immunized against 50%                   -              12%†              -
measles (%)
MDG5: Maternal Mortality
Maternal mortality ratio (per 509                   127            1700              425
100,000 live births)
Births attended by skilled health 57%               90%            5%                90%
staff (%)
MDG6: HIV/AIDS, Malaria, and TB
Contraceptive prevalence (% of 7%                   -              <1% •             -
women ages 15-49)
HIV Prevalence (% adults ages 15- 1.6% †            -              2.6% *            -
49)
Incidence of TB (per 100,000 per 90 §               -              325 §             -
year)
Children under 5 with fever 33%                     -              36%               -
treated with anti-malarials (%)
MDG7: Environment
Access to an improved water 70%                     85%            27%               64%
source (% of population)
Access to improved sanitation (% 64%                82%            15%               58%
of population)
MDG8: Partnership
Fixed line and mobile phones (per 1,000 26.5 §                             <1 *
people)

                                                                                           84
  December
           MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
  29, 2009

           Annex 9: Selection Criteria for TOKTEN Volunteers

  Transfer of Knowledge Through Expatriate Nationals (TOKTEN)
  Join TOKTEN as Expatriate Professional:


Requirements:
Any Sudanese national or a person of Sudanese origin living abroad must meet the
following criteria to be eligible for inclusion in the roaster as a TOKTEN Volunteer in
Sudan:

• University degree (Bachelor or higher degrees)
• Minimum five years of relevant working experience in a professional area
• At least 25 years of age (there is no upper age limit)
• Ability to work in partnerships and adjust to difficult living conditions
• Genuine interest and commitment to rebuilding Sudan, and willingness to share skills
and knowledge
• Documentary evidence of living abroad as Sudanese-origin with permanent resident
status or nationality of another country apart from Sudan

The criteria above represent the minimum requirements for roasters of TOKTEN
candidates. The criteria for selection of candidates for TOKTEN assignment will
depend on the requirements specified by requesting organizations and institutions for
different assignments.

Points of Clarifications on TOKTEN:
• Eligible candidate: a professional of Sudanese origin who lives abroad, and has
permanent residence or the citizenship of another country.
• Type of project: TOKTEN Sudan is neither a Return Programme nor an
Employment Scheme for Sudanese living abroad.
• Duration of TOKTEN service: TOKTEN Volunteers serve for short time (1 – 12
weeks) to share their professional experiences for recovery and development of
Sudan.
• Number of TOKTEN assignments possible: TOKTEN Volunteers can be invited
again to Sudan for Repeated Assignments.
• Status of TOKTEN volunteers: They are regarded as International Consultants
providing voluntary service for their home country, Sudan.
• Support for TOKTEN volunteers: TOKTEN support them with specified Allowances
& Not Salaries
• Strategy of support by TOKTEN Sudan: The project uses “Demand-Driven”
approach to support beneficiary organizations in Sudan.

Consultants Selection process:
The process of selecting and recruiting TOKTEN Volunteers are as follows:

                                                                                          85
  December
           MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
  29, 2009


- The requesting institution submits a request focusing on their needs on specific area.
- Detailed Terms of Reference (TOR) are prepared by TOKTEN Team identifying
precisely the problem the institution willing to address including the exact role of the
consultant along with the expected outcome, the TOR will be published on TOKTEN
webpage.
- Extensive search methods are applied to find the suitable candidates for the
addressed assignment and make short list.
- With Consultation with the requested institution, the most appropriate candidate will
be selected and informed.
- An interview will be held together with the requesting institution in order to define the
specific areas to be covered by the professional TOKTEN Consultant.
• The volunteer should insure that the following documents been submitted before
his/her arrival to Sudan:
• Documentary Evidence of Sudanese origin and Living Abroad.
• Documentary evidence of Credentials (Academic and professional Certificates).
• Confirmation for acceptance of the TOKTEN Assignment and TOKTEN Conditions of
Service.
• Medical Examination (Medical Certificate of Fitness is needed).
• Life and Medical Insurance Coverage Policy for the period of TOKTEN assignment.

Type of TOKTEN Volunteers Service/support:
Assignments of TOKTEN Volunteers will be directed mainly at capacity building, and
gap-filling roles will be avoided. In this respect, the functions of TOKTEN Volunteers
should be mainly concerned with capacity building for national counterpart/s and host
organizations through the following activities:
• Instructing: To deliver specialized lectures, conduct seminars / workshops /
symposia and training courses.
• Research & Development: Initiating a research activity, participating in an ongoing
research project or developing projects. This will include training of national
counterparts in projects.
• Practical/Action Project: Realization of a practical project, such as establishing a
laboratory, setting up a production line or selecting and installing equipments, etc.
• Advisory Service: To make recommendations on policy issues and technical matters
and on implementation of top priority sector programmes

Procedures to be taken after the consultancy:
Upon completion of TOKTEN Assignment, TOKTEN consultants/Volunteers are
required to submit:
• TOKTEN Volunteer final report will be hand out describing his/her works and
achievements based on TOR. Click here to download the report.
• Evaluation of activities undertaken. Click here to download the evaluation form
• Possible follow-up activities that the institution will undertake after the completion of
the assignment.

The host institution in turn submits an evaluation of TOKTEN Volunteer for the
                                                                                              86
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

completed assignment. Click on ( English or Arabic) to download the evaluation
form.
The host institutions also are requested to submit an Assignment impact assessment
form after the assignment implementation that describes the contribution (outputs,
effects/outcomes and impact) of the Volunteer that affects institution.


(Source: TOKTEN Sudan Website; www.sd.undp.org/projects/tokten.htm)




                                                                                     87
  December
           MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
  29, 2009

                        Annex 10: How TOKTEN Works
  Transfer of Knowledge Through Expatriate Nationals (TOKTEN)
  How Does TOKTEN work:



Volunteerism behind TOKTEN:
TOKTEN assignments are based on volunteerism, which embodies a number of
values such as free will, commitment, engagement and solidarity. Volunteering brings
social benefit to the individual volunteer through trust building and reciprocity among
citizens.

Recruitment Process:
Recruitment of TOKTEN volunteers is demand-driven, based on request by Sudan
national institutions and organizations. Hence, recruited expatriate professionals are
placed in various institutions to share their skills and expertise for a short period of
time (from one to eight weeks in various development areas).

However, there is flexibility for longer assignment duration or contract extension up to
a maximum of three months of TOKTEN assignment based on mutual agreement
between TOKTEN Volunteer and TOKTEN Project.

TOKTEN consultants are considered Volunteers. UNDP covers travel expenses to
and from the participant's country of residence, and provide living allowance in Sudan.
Motivated, highly creative, and experienced candidates, who meet the recruitment
criteria, are invited to complete an application form (click to download and save it) to
be included in TOKTEN Sudan Roster.

Development focus of TOKTEN:
The deployment of TOKTEN Volunteers focuses on the following priority development
areas indicated in the project document:

• Governance and Rule of Law
• Gender in Development
• Poverty eradication
• human resources development
• Sustainable Natural Resource and Environmental Conservation and Management
• Rural Development,
• Business and Sustainable Livelihood Development
• Agriculture, Food Security, and Rural Development
• Health
• Education, Training and Research

However, other areas of development may be considered by the project management

                                                                                           88
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

(UNDP and counterparts) if deemed as development priorities. Defining priorities for
TOKTEN volunteers‟ services are considered very important for the efficiency and
success of the project.

TOKTEN Advantages:
Different experiences around the world showed that several advantages have been
gained when dealing with TOKTEN Project. In Sudan, The overall advantage is
building knowledge bridges between the local and the Diaspora Sudanese. Majority
includes but not limited to:

• Knowing the same cultural and linguistic linkages facilitate transferring of Knowledge
from TOKTEN consultants to their home country
• The TOKTEN Programme has proved to be an effective means for mobilizing the
skills of experts living abroad, for services back at home; thus, provides an added
dimension of technical cooperation that contributes to reverse the problem of brain
drain;
• Cost effectiveness. Host institutions receive TOKTEN experts contribution at
relatively lower cost because TOKTEN consultants volunteer their services, waiving
the normally high fees of international technical experts.
• TOKTEN consultants are usually talented professional highly motivated by a desire
to support and give something back to their countries.
• Time saving. First-come, first-served

Target Beneficiaries
The main beneficiaries of the TOKTEN project are the institutions that host the
TOKTEN Volunteers. The following Sudanese institutions benefit, as host
organizations from the deployment of TOKTEN Volunteers:
• Ministries and key administration/institutions at the central, provincial, and local
levels.
• Universities.
• Vocational Institutions
• Research organizations.
• The private sector.

In view of the large number of civil society organizations in Sudan, support to civil
society organizations would be provided in coordination with any of the earlier
mentioned targeted beneficiary institutions.

(Source: TOKTEN Sudan Website; www.sd.undp.org/projects/tokten.htm)




                                                                                         89
    December
             MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
    29, 2009

          Annex 11: Conditions of Service for TOKTEN Volunteers
TRANSFER OF KNOWLEDGE THROUGH EXPATRIATE NATIONALS (TOKTEN) PROJECT, SUDAN


               Conditions of Service for TOKTEN Volunteers
Transfer of Knowledge Through Expatriate Nationals, hereafter referred to as TOKTEN, is a
window of opportunity for professional expatriate nationals to volunteer their services for their
country of origin for a maximum short period of time on an assignment. The motivation of a
TOKTEN Volunteer is driven by a desire to contribute to the development process of her/his
country of origin1.

Assignment under TOKTEN Projects as based on volunteerism, which is based on the values of
free will, commitment, engagement and solidarity, which are the foundations of volunteerism.
Volunteering brings benefit to the individual volunteer. It makes important contributions,
economically, as well as socially. It contributes to creating social cohesion and capital, through
helping to build trust and reciprocity among citizens. Hence:

   TOKTEN Volunteers accept their assignments not as employment but as service, and for a
    short and limited period: working with TOKTEN is not a career proposition.
   TOKTEN Project is neither a Repatriation Programme nor an Employment Scheme.
   There is no element of commitment to permanent return to the country of origin for
    TOKTEN Volunteers, However, repeated mission, by TOKTEN Volunteer to the country of
    origin, to enhance the sustainability of the TOKTEN Project are possible.
   TOKTEN Volunteers are regarded as international consultants providing voluntary service
    for their home country
   TOKTEN Project supports TOKTEN Volunteers with specified Allowances (International
    travel fare; living allowance; and support for medical and life insurance) and Not Salaries.
   TOKTEN Project is demand-driven, meaning that recruitment of TOKTEN Volunteers
    epends on requests from beneficiary organizations in Sudan.

I. RULES OF CONDUCT:
TOKTEN Volunteers undertake their duties and conduct themselves in the interest of the United
Nations and the government of Sudan. Detail of the Rules of Conduct is attached to this
document.

UNDP will reserve the right to terminate the assignment of a TOKTEN Volunteer without any
notice, when it believes that s/he did not observe the Codes of Conduct.

2. DURATION OF ASSIGNMENT:
Duration of TOKTEN assignment will range between one to eight weeks. However, there is
flexibility for longer assignment duration or contract extension up to a maximum of three months
of TOKTEN assignment (initial assignment and contract extension) based on mutual agreement
between the TOKTEN Volunteer and the TOKTEN Project.

Repeated assignments are possible, limited to the same period of time specified above.

                                                                                               90
    December
             MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
    29, 2009

3. RECRUITMENT AND TRAVEL FROM COUNTRY OF RESIDENCE:
a. Recruitment procedures: Once the candidature is approved by the host organisation, the
recruitment of the TOKTEN Volunteers is subject to acceptance of assignment and TOKTEN
Conditions of Service, positive interview, and submission of a medical certificate of good health
from a qualified medical practitioner.

b. Mode of assignment: TOKTEN assignment is strictly on unaccompanied basis.

c. Pre-assignment Allowance: The TOKTEN Volunteer will receive a one-time payment for the
purpose of covering pre-departure expenses, including costs of required visas, medical
certificate, vaccination, travel between place of residence and the nearest airport, etc.

d. International Travel to and from Sudan: TOKTEN Volunteers will be provided with
round-trip air tickets at the direct and least costly economy fare from the nearest airport to and
from the duty station. They will also receive terminals and daily subsistence allowance for
unavoidable stopovers as per UN procedures.

TOKTEN Volunteers must handover the return portion of the air-ticket to the TOKTEN Project
upon arrival in Sudan (please refer item 7 below).

3 IN-COUNTRY ENTITLEMENTS FOR TOKTEN VOLUNTEERS:
a. TOKTEN Living Allowance (TLA): The TOKTEN Living Allowance (TLA) is a monthly
Living Allowance to TOKTEN Volunteers to cover basic needs, accommodation, utilities during
assignments, and should not be considered as a salary. Details of the TLA specific to a particular
duration of assignment will be indicated in the letter of offer to TOKTEN Volunteers. The TLA
allowance is not negotiable, but would be subject to periodic revisions.

b. Insurance: The TOKTEN Project will reimburse TOKTEN volunteers up to a maximum
amount established by the project for subscribing for health, life and permanent disability
insurance with the company of choice of the volunteer. It is mandatory for all TOKTEN
Volunteers to subscribe to an insurance policy within or outside Sudan.

c. Note on Annual Leave: Due to the short duration of the assignment, there will be no annual
leave accrual for TOKTEN Volunteers. However, the weekends and holidays as observed by
host organizations are available to TOKTEN Volunteers.

4. CONTRACTS OF TOKTEN VOLUNTEERS:
a. Initial Contract: TOKTEN Volunteers will sign a contract for their initial assignments upon
arrival in the country. The effective date of the contracts will be the date of arrival in Sudan.

b. Contract Extension: Contracts of TOKTEN Volunteers may be extended beyond initial
contract. The initial contract and the contract extension will not exceed a maximum of 12 weeks
of service for a TOKTEN Volunteer.




                                                                                                     91
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

The TOKTEN Volunteers Conditions of Service is applicable to initial assignment and extension
to assignment of a TOKTEN Volunteers. Hence, a TOKTEN Volunteer by accepting the initial
assignment and contract extension also accepts this Condition of Service.

5. SECURITY, IMMUNITIES AND PRIVILEDGES:
a. Security: TOKTEN Volunteers are required to strictly observe all security instructions issued
by the Designated Official of the United Nations in Sudan. Any non-compliance with security
instructions will result in termination of assignment. The TOKTEN UN Volunteer will be
included in the local UN security management system and plan, as applicable.

b. Immunities and privileges: The functional immunities and privileges of TOKTEN
Volunteers will be afforded by the Government of Sudan. TOKTEN Volunteers may be extended
with the courtesies, privileges and facilities in accordance with their status as personnel of the
United Nations.

6. RECOURSE PROCEDURE:
A TOKTEN Volunteer who wishes to contest an administrative decision made by the TOKTEN
Project shall write to the UNDP Country Director requesting that such decision be reviewed. The
letter must be sent within one week from the time the TOKTEN Volunteer receives written
notification of the contested decision. The decision of the UNDP Country Director will constitute
final settlement of the dispute and will be binding on both parties.

7. SEPARATION FROM SERVICE
The assignment may be terminated either by the TOKTEN Project or the TOKTEN Volunteer by
giving seven days of written notice. The TOKTEN Project will decide on a case-by-case basis
whether the returned portion of the air-ticket could be released to the TOKTEN UN Volunteer
who resigns from the assignment.

8. REMARKS
The TOKTEN Project reserves the right to amend the conditions of assignment without prejudice
to the rights acquired under it. Any divergence in the interpretation of the above is the
prerogative of the TOKTEN Project and is not subject to negotiations.

             RULES OF CONDUCT FOR TOKTEN VOLUNTEERS IN SUDAN
1. TOKTEN Volunteers will ensure that they undertake their duties and conduct themselves in
the interest of the United Nations and the government of Sudan they are serving.

2. In accordance with the ideals of volunteer service, TOKTEN Volunteers will be guided by the
motivation to devote their knowledge and abilities without regard to financial benefit, towards
realizing the broad objectives lay down by the United Nations Charter for the economic and
social advancement of humanity.

3. TOKTEN Volunteers will not engage in any activity that is detrimental to the proper
performance of their duties. TOKTEN Volunteers will not accept any supplementary payment
from a government or any other source, even when intended to cover the performance of any
additional duties or activities.
                                                                                               92
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009


4. Although TOKTEN Volunteers are not expected to relinquish national sentiments or political
and religious convictions, they will not engage in any political activity that may be inconsistent
with the independence and impartiality required of persons affiliated with the United Nations.
TOKTEN Volunteers will avoid any action and, in particular, any public statement, which may
adversely reflect on their international status as TOKTEN Volunteers.

5. During their assignment, TOKTEN Volunteers will not undertake any of the following, except
in the normal course of official duties or with prior explicit approval of the UNDP Resident
Representative. They will not issue statements to the press or other agencies of public
information; release visual information for publication; submit articles, books or other material
for publication or take part in mass communication activities such as film, radio or television
productions which are in any way related to project activities or interests of the United Nations
or Sudan.

6. TOKTEN Volunteers will, at all times, respect the laws, moral codes, and traditions prevailing
in Sudan.

7. During their assignment, TOKTEN Volunteers will neither seek nor accept instructions from
any government or from any other authority external to the UN system, including representatives
of Co-operating Organizations. TOKTEN Volunteers assigned to government of Sudan
institutions, departments or NGOs, however, will receive work-related instructions from
designated officials of the host organisation, as appropriate.

8. TOKTEN Volunteers are not authorized to accept or undertake outside jobs during their
TOKTEN assignments. The UNDP Resident Representative may approve non-remunerative
service for the TOKTEN Volunteers together with their assignments in consultation with host
organizations.

9. In addition to the above, TOKTEN Volunteers are required to comply with other guidelines
for conducts and security measures that may be issued, from time to time, by the Designated
Official of the United Nations in Sudan.




                                                                                               93
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009

               Annex 12: Profile of TOKTEN Implemented Assignments – 2006-2009




                                                                      -



                                                                      -


                                                                      -




                                                                      -

                                                                      -

                                                                      -

                                                                      -

                                                                      -




                                                                      -
                                                                                 94
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009


                                             -


                                             -

                                             -

                                             -




                                             -


                                             -
                                             -


                                             -

                                             -

                                             -




                                             -



                                             -


                                                 95
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009
                                             -



                                             -


                                             -

                                             -


                                             -

                                             -


                                             -


                                             -




                                             -
                                             -
                                             -

                                             -




                                                 96
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009
                                             -



                                             -




                                             -

                                             -
                                             -
                                             -

                                             -


                                             -



                                             -




                                             -




                                             -




                                             -




                                                 97
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009


                                             -



                                             -




                                             -



                                             -


                                             -


                                             -



                                             -


                                             -

                                             -

                                             -




                                                 98
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009
                                             -


                                             -


                                             -


                                             -


                                             -


                                             -

                                             -

                                             -

                                             -



                                             -


                                             -




                                             -




                                                 99
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009

                                             -


                                             -




                                             -


                                             -




                                                 100
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009

                                             -

                                             -


                                             -
                                             -
                                             -
                                             -
                                             -

                                             -
                                             -

                                             -
                                             -

                                             -
                                             -

                                             -

                                             -



                                                 o



                                                 o



                                             -




                                                     101
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009
                                             -
                                             -
                                             -

                                             -
                                             -
                                             -
                                             -




                                             -

                                             -
                                             -
                                             -
                                             -
                                             -




                                             -

                                             -



                                             -




                                                 102
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009




                                             -

                                             -
                                             -




                                             -
                                             -
                                             -




                                             -
                                             -
                                             -
                                             -



                                                 103
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009




                                                                                         -




                                                                                         -




                           Research,     TOKTEN Advisor on       Kassala Locality,
                           Montoring     Research Methodology,   Directorate of Social   -
                           &Evaluation   Survey Design and       and Cultural Affairs
                           and data      Data Collection and
                                                                                         -
                           analyst       Analysis
                                                                                         -
                                                                                         -


                                                                                         -




                                                                                             104
December
         MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
29, 2009
                                             -




                                                 105
     December
              MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
     29, 2009

                Annex 13: TOKTEN Project Evaluation Forms

1.     Training Evaluation Form (for participants)



                        United Nations Development Programme
             Transfer of Knowledge Through Expatriate Nationals (TOKTEN)

                             Training Evaluation Form


Training Course Title:_________________________________________________


1. Date:..…./….../2008

2. Name (Optional):…………………..

3. Gender:            { } Male               { } Female

4. Age category:         up to 25{ }               26 to 40 { }            41 and over { }

5. Educational level:
             o Primary school:
             o Secondary school:
             o Professional training
             o University
             o Post university
6. Position:…………………………………………

7. Please tick the suitable number corresponding to each statement
Key: 1= strongly satisfied       2= satisfied,        3= Neutral,          4= dissatisfied,
     5= strongly dissatisfied
Statement                                                           1      2    3     4       5
Training Modules:
1-The objective of the Modules are Clear
2- The contents are useful to me in my work performance
3-The time given to the every module is enough
4- Balance between lecture, group work and practical learning
was appropriate
5- Topics adequately covered
Lecture:
1- Presentation was good
2- Methodology was clear

                                                                                              106
   December
            MID-TERM REVIEW OF TOKTEN PROJECT
   29, 2009

3- Tim management was OK
Trainer:
1- The trainer is knowledgeable on the topic
2- The trainer has rich practical experience
3- The trainer has rich theoretical knowledge
4- The trainer encouraged learning
4 - Group work was interesting and helped to understanding
Course environment:-
1- Venue is comfortable
2- Time table appropriate
3- Stationary sufficient
4- Preparation of the training was punctual

8. General:

   1. Do you think you have learned new things in the training which will help your work as
      professional?

_____________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

   2. Do you think that you need more intervention on the some topics of the training
      modules? If "yes" please list the topics?
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________

   3. Do you have any other comments
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________




                                                                                          107
                EVALUATION OF TOKTEN SUDAN ASSIGNMENT
                    Evaluation by the TOKTEN Volunteer
2.     Evaluation by TOKTEN Volunteer Form

Name of TOKTEN Volunteer
Title of TOKTEN Post
Telephone number
Fax number
Email address
Name of Host Institution
Dates of TOKTEN assignment      From:                         To:

A.     General Information:

1. Where did you hear about TOKTEN Project, Sudan?


2. Was information provided before your departure from your country of residence sufficient?
    YES     NO → If answer is NO, please describe what information not provided that would
have been useful to have.




B.     Benefits of Service offered during the TOKTEN Assignment:

3. What is the result expected from your TOKTEN assignment?




4. What were the main types of activities undertaken during the visit?
Please describe briefly.




                                             108
                EVALUATION OF TOKTEN SUDAN ASSIGNMENT
                    Evaluation by the TOKTEN Volunteer


5. Were there any differences between the actual activities you have undertaken, and the
Terms of Reference provided on the assignment? NO              YES → If answer is YES, please
describe how they differ.




                                              109
6. Explain the specific benefits you have offered to the Host institution / other beneficiary
institutions (if any):




7. What do you consider as the expected impact of your TOKTEN assignment on the host institutions /
other beneficiary institutions (if any):




8. Number of personnel in your host institution / beneficiary institutions (if any) who have
benefited from your TOKTEN assignment:

i. Host institutions (Number of Departments or     ii. Number of Personnel who benefited from
Units that benefited from the TOKTEN assignment: ( host institution: (         )
)
iii. Number of other beneficiary institutions that  iv. Number of personnel from other
benefited from the TOKTEN assignment:               beneficiary institutions who benefited from
(          )                                        the TOKTEN assignment: (            )

B.     Level of Satisfaction with TOKTEN Experience:

Please indicate your level of satisfaction regarding your assignment (select only one level of
satisfaction per row).
Keys: 1 = Very Satisfied 2 = Satisfied 3 = Dissatisfied 4 = Very Dissatisfied

                                                                                  1     2        3   4
9. Process of your selection for the TOKTEN assignment
10. Technical preparation and planning for the TOKTEN assignment
11. Level of preparedness by the Host Institution for the TOKTEN




                                               110
assignment (logistics arrangement, availability of counterparts, etc)
12. Level of motivation and actions by host institution and counterparts
during the assignment.
13. Level of interest shown by the management of the host institution in the
TOKTEN assignment
14. Quality of service delivery by TOKTEN Volunteer during the assignment.
15. Duration of service delivery by TOKTEN Volunteer on the assignment
16. Acceptability of Host Institution to new idea (willingness /ability to
absorb and utilize your assistance)
17. Resources (logistics support, etc) provided by the host institution vis-à-
vis resources available for the TOKTEN assignment.
18. Extent of your contribution to capacity development of staff and
institution toward realization of the host institution’s objective.
19. Support by the TOKTEN Volunteer in establishing Networks with
professional and other relevant bodies outside of Sudan
20. Your work relationship with counterparts during the TOKTEN
assignment.
21. Relevance of TOKTEN to Human and Institution Capacity Building in
Sudan towards development of the country.
22. Support by TOKTEN Project on the TOKTEN assignment
23. Commitment of host institution to achieving the expected results of the
TOKTEN assignment.
24. Amount of allowances provided by TOKTEN Volunteers




                                               111
25. If you give answer 3 (Dissatisfied) or 4 (Very Dissatisfied) in the rating above, please
explain:

Question number Reasons




26. Are there any follow-up activities to be undertaken by you or the Host
Institution after completion of the present assignment? If yes, please
describe:




27. Would you like to participate in future assignments as a TOKTEN Volunteer?

   YES, please keep my name on the roster.
   NO, please delete my name from the roster. (Please explain.)




28. Please comment briefly on your Best Experience regarding your TOKTEN assignment in
Sudan.




29. Please comment briefly on your Worst Experience (if any) regarding your TOKTEN
assignment in Sudan.




30. Do you have any suggestions on how to improve TOKTEN assignments in Sudan?


                                                112
31. Do you have any additional comments?




             (Signature)                                           (Date)

Thank you for your cooperation. After completion, please return this questionnaire to TOKTEN
Project, Sudan by fax or email under the heading: “Evaluation of TOKTEN Assignment”.

TOKTEN Project, Sudan
UNDP Office
Khartoum, Sudan
Fax:          +249 183 773128
Email:        tokten.sd@undp.org




                                             113
3.   Evaluation by Host Institution Form




                                           114
ABOUT THE CONSULTANT


Abdullah Mansaray holds a PhD in Social Science Education from the University of Ibadan,
Nigeria, and is a Professor of Education and an expert in evaluation and teacher development. He
has over 30 years of experience in university teaching in Nigeria (at the University of Ibadan)
and in Sierra Leone. He has done consultancy work for a number of UN and donor organizations,
and international NGOs in the African region, including UNDP, UNESCO, UNICEF, Plan
International, Education Action International (EAI-UK), Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC),
USAID, and the Japanese International Cooperation Agency (JICA). He has over 50 publications
and has supervised over 10 PhD dissertations. Until August 2009, he was Pro-Chancellor and
Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Bo Campus), Njala University in Sierra Leone.

Address: Department of Teacher Education
         Faculty of Education
         Njala University
         Bo Campus
         Towama, Bo City
         SIERRA LEONE
               OR
         Njala University
         Private Mail Bag
         Freetown
         SIERRA LEONE

E-mail: abdulmans2002@yahoo.com
Mobile: +232-76-517-288
        +232-33-459-755




                                              115

								
To top