1. IAOD Evaluation Seminar Demystifying Evaluation in WIPO- Best Practices from Initial Evaluations Geneva November, 8 2012 2012 KENYA COUNTRY IP PORTFOLIO START UP NATIONAL IP ACADEMIES OGADA TOM

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

3. Role and Steps a.To find answers to the questions identified in the terms of reference b. To ensure that the exercise is carried such as to meet three evaluation objectives Learning Participation Decision making c.Provide comfort to key stakeholders on the rationale of the exercise 1. Role as external evaluator

4. Understanding the terms of reference Inception Report Data collection Data analysis Reporting 2. Steps followed in evaluation Role and Steps

5. a. Understanding the terms of reference Purpose and utility Scope Resources available (time, HR, Finance) b. Inception Report Key questions to be answered Data collection methodology Key respondents Limitations 3. Steps followed in evaluation cont Role and Steps

6. Steps followed cont. c. Data Collection Face to face Questionnaire Telephone/Skype d. Data Analysis and evaluation criteria Program design and delivery strategy Relevance Effectiveness Efficiency Synergy Sustainability

7. e. Reporting Findings Conclusions (#findings) Recommendations (#findings and Conclusions) Steps followed cont.

8. Kenya IP Portfolio Gerry Cooney – Team Leader Alessandra Narciso Tom Ogada 1.Background Kenya is viewed as a success story in IP in the region Kenya has a long time collaboration with WIPO WIPO has supported various IP (projects) portfolio since 1990s Evaluation focused on the period 2005-2010 Evaluation period: July 2012 to January 2012

9. Kenya IP Portfolio Gerry Cooney – Team Leader Alessandra Narciso Tom Ogada 2. What was done Inception mission and interview in Geneva, Kenya and ARIPO Data collection in Kenya and Geneva Data collection Presentation of initial findings in Kenya Presentation of revised report to Geneva Comments and suggestions Final report

10. Kenya IP Portfolio Gerry Cooney – Team Leader Alessandra Narciso Tom Ogada 3. Results 11 Findings 6 Conclusions 4 Recommendations

11. Finding 1 WIPOs support to Kenya (2005-2010) was relevant to Kenyan development priorities and in line with the Kenyan development agenda) Vision 2030 STI policy Industrialization Policy Climate change strategy Trade Conclusion Kenya still needs to do a lot to strengthen its IP system – e.g IP awareness National IP Policy and Strategy Review of IP laws Development of new IP laws Training and education in IP Recommendation WIPO should continue its support in Kenya and make its future investments strategically in recognition of the evolving IP landscape and emerging needs. Relevance

12. Finding 2 Kenya had a much higher profile, stature, expertise and capacity in IP in 2010 than it did in 2005. Interviews with key Kenyan IP stakeholders credit WIPO with direct and indirect contributions to these positive changes. Conclusion Through contribution from WIPO, Kenya made considerable progress in the development of IP in 2005-10. Today, Kenya is regarded as a leader in IP in the African continent. However past support has focused on IP Offices Recommendation To meet the growing and evolving needs for IP support in Kenya, WIPO should extend its support beyond KIPI and KECOBO to other IP stakeholders such universities, research organizations and ACA Effectiveness

13. Finding 6 WIPO contributions to building the IP capacity of individuals and national IP offices are generally being sustained. Noted shortcomings include some orphaned WIPO projects in Kenya as well as inadequate support from the government Conclusion WIPOs direct and indirect support are being sustained by targeted institutions and individuals. However, the sustainability of WIPO infrastructural projects can be a problem when the govts commitment for ongoing support is not obtained at the initiation of projects Recommendation WIPO should enhance the sustainability of its activities by developing government- supported exit strategies Sustainability

14. Challenges Conclusi 1. Lack of documented information on support given or received. 2.Weak M&E system in beneficiary country 3.Limited preparation of the stakeholders for the evaluation process 4.Involving three experts from three continents Managing calendars Time difference Difficulty in agreeing on the style and depth of the report 5.Making acceptable recommendations to key the Stakeholders. 6.Slow feedback on the report

15. Startup IP Academy Tom Ogada 1.Background Project initiated in 2009 to assist DC and LDC to establish their own IP academy Project piloted in four countries (Dominican Republic, Peru, Colombia and Tunisia) If successful scale up would follow Evaluation covered period 2009-2012

16. 2. What was done Inception mission and interview in Geneva. Face to face data collection in Geneva Data collection through questionnaire from the beneficiaries Presentation of initial findings in Geneva Comments and suggestions Final report Startup IP Academy Tom Ogada

17. 3. Results 6 Findings 7 Conclusions 4 Recommendations Startup IP Academy Tom Ogada

18. Finding 1 The project document was appropriate for use as a guide for the implementation of the pilot projects during phase I but will need further improvements to make it more appropriate for continued use in the project implementation in phase II Conclusion The project document as was designed, together with the improvements so far undertaken, will require further modification to be appropriate for use as a guide for the implementation of the project in phase II Recommendations The project document, together with improvements made so far, be further modified by the WIPO Academy to provide clarity and make the process more efficient, flexible and demand driven Project design and implementation

19. Finding 2 The objectives of the National IP startup Academy Project are highly relevant to the needs of the Member States, the countrys IP institutions, individual beneficiary from the members and the WIPOs Development Agenda recommendations Conclusion The project is relevant to the needs and aspirations of most developing and least developed countries. Although the piloting process has not been completed, the validity of the project concepts has been proven Recommendations 1.The CDIP agrees that the pilot process be completed and extended for two years. 2.That consideration be given by Member States on the future direction of the project beyond the end of phase II, so as to meet future requests from Member States and to consider a gradual phasing out of the ongoing cooperation Relevance

20. Challenges IP Startup Academy Conclusi 1.Language and communication 2.Data collection from the beneficiary only through questionnaires 3.Low questionnaires return rate 4.No opportunity for feedback from the beneficiaries on the initial findings 5.Limited time and resources

21. Lessons learned Conclusi 1. Culture of M&E not yet developed amongst the key stakeholders. 2.Inception phase very important 3.People do not like answering interview questionnaires, direct or telephone interviews are preferred 4.Successful evaluation depends on the support given by the client 5.Preparation of the stakeholders for the evaluation is important 6.Strong documentation facilitates quality evaluation 7.Managing inception interview 8.Prompt feedback on report

22. Recommendations Conclusi 1.Deepen the culture of evaluation amongst WIPO staff and the partners (beneficiaries) 2.Strengthen documentation and reporting by beneficiaries 3.Improve on the management of evaluation process Stakeholders preparation Provide for enough time and resources for data collection Provide for active review of the initial findings, conclusions and recommendations by the beneficiaries Promote use of evaluation results

23. THANK YOU