of 16
8/12/2019 IFIP RM Evaluation
1/16
2014 International Funders for
Indigenous Peoples NYC Regional
MeetingEvaluation response for March 5 luncheon on Food Sover eignty,
and March 6 full day regional meeting.
8/12/2019 IFIP RM Evaluation
2/16
2014 IFIP New York March 5thRegional Meeting Evaluation
Results and Recommendations
Question #1: I have a greater awareness of why and how to engage with
Indigenous communities?
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
Result:
When asked if the survey takers felt if they had a greater awareness of why and how to engage with indigenous
communities, 2 out of 17 survey takers felt that they somewhat agreed, 10 out of 17 survey takers felt they
agreed, and 5 out of the 17 survey takers felt they strongly agree. Therefore on average majority of the group
felt this was covered with the session.
Question #2: I have a greater awareness of funding strategies to address
climate change and food resilience in Indigenous communities?
Result:
0
2
4
6
8
10
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
When asked if the survey takers felt they had a greater awareness of funding strategies to address climate
change and food resilience 1 participant did not agree, 8 somewhat agreed, 6 agreed and 2 strongly agreed
Therefore the majority of the survey takers somewhat agreed that this session covered the awareness of funding
strategies to address climate change and food resilience in Indigenous communities.
1
8/12/2019 IFIP RM Evaluation
3/16
Question #3: I have a greater awareness of what IFIP believes in and its
core activities?
0
1
2
34
5
6
7
8
9
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
Result:
When asked if the survey takers felt they had a greater awareness of what IFIP believes in and its core activities3 out of 17 survey takers somewhat agree, 6 out of 17 survey takers agreed, and 8 out of 17 survey takers
strongly agreed. Therefore the majority of the survey takers strongly agreed they had a greater awareness ofwhat IFIP believes in and its core activities.
Question #4: The Session created meaningful opportunities for me to
interact with members of IFIP?
Result:
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
When asked if the survey takers felt if the session created a meaningful opportunity for me to interact with
members of IFIP 1 out of 17 survey takers felt it did not, 6 out of 17 survey takers felt they could somewhat
agree to this, 5 out of 17 survey takers agreed, and 5 out of 17 survey takers strongly agreed. Therefore the
majority of the survey takers felt they somewhat felt an opportunity to interact with members of IFIP.
2
8/12/2019 IFIP RM Evaluation
4/16
Question #5: How would I rate my speakers?
Evelyn Arce
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
Shaun Paul
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
Fatima Jibrell
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
3
8/12/2019 IFIP RM Evaluation
5/16
Valentina Dmitrieva
0
2
4
6
8
10
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
Pablo Miss
0
2
4
68
10
12
14
16
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
Nikhil Aziz
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
Result:
When asked how the survey takers felt about each of the speaker, majority of the 17 survey takers felt the
speakers did a wonderful job in presentations overall.
4
8/12/2019 IFIP RM Evaluation
6/16
Question #6: The content of the session on Climate Change and Food
resilience was appropriate and informative?
0
1
2
34
5
6
7
8
9
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
Result:
When asked if the survey takers felt if the content of the session on Climate Change and Food resilience was
appropriate and informative; 2 out of 17 survey takers somewhat agreed, 8 out of 17 survey takers agreed and 7
out of 17 survey takers strongly agreed. Therefore majority of the survey takers agreed that the content of thesessions on Climate Change and Food resilience was appropriate and informative.
Question #8: What topics would you like to see at future sessions?
Result:
Marine and coastal communities who are indigenous and over by illegal.
Supporting and working with indigenous youth How to resist agribusiness campaign against rational indigenous food production. More information about funders and funding strategies Still learning More about environmental use being done at the country lead New Networks of Knowledge Intersection of arts/culture and ecology More detail on the topic like food sovereignty Women Leadership Governance/advocacy Same topic but more in depth and concrete
5
8/12/2019 IFIP RM Evaluation
7/16
Question #9: What did you like the most about the session?
Result:
Substance, friendly and feel commitment from many The Panelists Voices from very different places and how they leave their community work naturally with issues of
environment
Small Size Good Conversation That such different regions and problems were represented Fatima Paul information foreign agent The variety of perspectives and the fact that speakers came from so far to offer their prospects Speakers perspectives were so broad Great presenters The concrete examples and stores both of problems and solutions The panelists first-hand experience were fascinating, especially Pablo and Fatima The ability to network and to hear perspectives from people who work on the ground Well-timed sessions; diversity of regions represented Discussion of soverence
Question #10: What did you like the least about the session?
Result:
Not as much opportunity to interact with fellow attendees Topics more scattered Physical layout made seeing presenters more challenging Need more time but well have that tomorrow Too Short That I have previous knowledge of the amazing area where Valentina is from but her talk was hard to
follow, not as engaging, maybe visually important.
6
8/12/2019 IFIP RM Evaluation
8/16
Question #11: Would you attend another session co-hosted by IFIP?
Result:
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Responses
Yes
No
No Answer
Maybe
When asked if the survey takers would attend another session co-hosted by IFIP, 11 out of 17 survey takers
responded that they would return to another session co-hosted by IFIP if there was one, and 6 out of 17 survey
takers did not answers.
Question #12: Would you recommend the session to your colleagues?
Another Topic?
Result:
0
2
4
6
8
10
Yes
No
No Answer
When asked if the survey takers would recommend the session to their colleagues, 10 out of 17 survey takers
responded that they would recommend the IFIP sessions to their colleague as 7 out of 17 survey takers did not
answer.
Question #13: What funders should IFIP invite to future sessions?
Result:
I dont know was the only answer reported7
8/12/2019 IFIP RM Evaluation
9/16
2014 IFIP New York March 6thRegional Meeting Evaluation
Results and Recommendations
Question #1: I have a greater awareness of why and how to engage with
Indigenous communities?
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
Result:
When asked if the survey takers felt if they had a greater awareness of why and how to engage with indigenous
communities, 2 out of 18 survey takers felt that they somewhat agreed, 6 out of 18 survey takers felt they
agreed, and 10 out of the 18 survey takers felt they strongly agree. Therefore on average majority of the group
felt they strongly agreed they have a greater awareness of why and how to engage with Indigenous
communities.
Question #2: I have a greater awareness of funding strategies to address
climate change and food resilience in Indigenous communities?
Result:
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
When asked if the survey takers felt they had a greater awareness of funding strategies to address climate
change and food resilience 1 participant did not respond, 4 somewhat agreed, 7 agreed and 6 strongly agreed.
8
8/12/2019 IFIP RM Evaluation
10/16
Therefore the majority of the survey takers agreed that this session covered the awareness of funding strategies
to address climate change and food resilience in Indigenous communities.
Question #3: I have a greater awareness of what IFIP believes in and its
core activities?
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
Result:
When asked if the survey takers felt they had a greater awareness of what IFIP believes in and its core activities
2 out of 18 survey takers somewhat agree, 7 out of 18 survey takers agreed, and 10 out of 18 survey takers
strongly agreed. Therefore the majority of the survey takers strongly agreed they had a greater awareness of
what IFIP believes in and its core activities.
Question #4: Did the Session created meaningful opportunities for me to
interact with members of IFIP?
Result:
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
When asked if the survey takers felt if the session created a meaningful opportunity for me to interact with
members of IFIP 2 out of 18 survey takers felt they could somewhat agree to this, 5 out of 18 survey takers
agreed, and 11 out of 18 survey takers strongly agreed. Therefore the majority of the survey takers felt they
strongly felt an opportunity to interact with members of IFIP.
9
8/12/2019 IFIP RM Evaluation
11/16
Question #5: Were you satisfied with Grant-makers Guide?
Result:
0
2
4
6
8
10
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
When asked if the survey takers felt if they were satisfied with the Grant-makers Guide, 5 out of 18 survey
takers felt they could agree to this, 9 out of 18 survey takers strongly agreed, and 4 out of 18 survey takers did
not respond. Therefore the majority of the survey takers felt they strongly were satisfied with the grand-makers
guide.
Question #6: How would I rate my speakers?
Evelyn Arce
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
Shaun Paul
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
10
8/12/2019 IFIP RM Evaluation
12/16
Fatima Jibrell
0
5
10
15
20
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
Valentina Dmitrieva
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
Pablo Miss
0
5
10
15
20
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
Suzanne Pelletier
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
Result:
When asked how the survey takers felt about each of the speaker, majority of the 18 survey takers felt the
speakers did a wonderful job in presentations overall.
11
8/12/2019 IFIP RM Evaluation
13/16
Question #7: the content of the session on the Grant-makers Guide was
appropriate and informative?
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
Result:
When asked if the survey takers felt if the if the content of the session the Grant-Makers Guide was appropriate
and informative 12 out of 18 survey takers felt they could somewhat agree to this, 3 out of 18 survey takers
agreed, 12 out of 18 survey takers strongly agreed, and 2 out of 18 survey takers had no response. Therefore themajority of the survey takers strongly felt the content of the session the Grant-Makers Guide was appropriate
and informative.
Question #8: The content of the session on Climate Change and Food
resilience was appropriate and informative?
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Do Not Agree Somewhat Agree Agree Strongly Agree No Response
Result:When asked if the survey takers felt if the content of the session on Climate Change and Food resilience was
appropriate and informative; 7 out of 18 survey takers agreed, 10 out of 18 survey takers strongly agreed, and 1
had no response. Therefore majority of the survey takers strongly agreed that the content of the sessions on
Climate Change and Food resilience was appropriate and informative.
12
8/12/2019 IFIP RM Evaluation
14/16
Question #9: What topics would you like to see at future Regional
Meetings?
Result:
How to measure success Success stories Traditional Knowledge Water protection Sacred lands Traditional knowledge Indigenous Media Poverty and income Assessments method of projects of IP Post 2015 Agenda Indigenous Peoples in Brazil
Marine Issues IPs rights to land When and how funders and indigenous groups can benefit from organizations
Question #8: What did you like the most about the session?
Result:
Speakers Opportunity to hear from others Panelists-Especially Speakers and Informal networking Nice to have a small group Wisdom in the room Direct discussion points NY Based The opportunity to learn from others and networking Different ecologic perspective Interaction with others Funders engaging on process that challenges IP access to funds Example of experience by IPS representatives
13
8/12/2019 IFIP RM Evaluation
15/16
Question #8: What did you like the least about the session?
Result:
PowerPoints Time pressure on speakers No room for break out opportunity Lack of direct funders grantee discussion Too short
Question #9: Would you attend another regional meeting by IFIP?
Result:
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Responses
Yes
No
No Answer
Maybe
When asked if the survey takers would attend another regional meeting with IFIP, 12 out of 18 survey takers
responded that they would return to another regional meeting if there was one, 1 out of 18 survey takers stated
they may return, and 5 did not respond to the survey.
14
8/12/2019 IFIP RM Evaluation
16/16
Question #10: Would you recommend the session to your colleagues?
Result:
0
5
10
15
Yes
No
No Answer
Maybe
When asked if the survey takers would recommend a regional meeting with IFIP, eight out of eight survey
takers responded that they would recommend the IFIP regional meeting and/or conference to other possible
survey takers.
Question #11: What funders should IFIP invite to future sessions?
Result:
Rockefeller Brothers Packard Jessie smith Noyes
Hewlett Foundation Oak foundation Ford Foundation Swift Foundation USAID MacArthur Oak (swiss) Foundation Rockefeller Foundation Gates International Foundations and Funders
15