Annex 11. Workshop evaluation

At the end of the workshop, all participants were requested to evaluate the event. Five flip charts with paper, each containing one of following five criteria: (i) To what degree were expectations met? (ii) How did each participant like the workshop? (iii) What did each one consider went well? (iv) What did not go well? And (v) What needed improvement?) were displayed in the room.

Each participant provided answers to the five questions either by writing an "X" in the place of his choice (criteria 1 and 2, for example) or by writing, directly on the chart, his/her choice. Choices were then tallied and reported back to plenary.

The results were as follows:

1. My expectations are met by:

2. How did you like the following? (number of responses)

	Very good	Good	Poor
Workshop content	16	7
Overall programme	17	6
Excursion	13	7
Organization/logistics	22
Group composition/ networking	16	2
Methodology	14	8
Facilitation	13	8

3. What went well:

• The whole process of the workshop encouraged full concentration and participation.
• I was very pleased with the organization of the workshop.
• I enjoyed working in small groups, like we decided on the last day in the P and I group.
• Organization of the workshop was very good.
• Good discussions and outputs.
• The organization of the workshop, the objectives, the development of the workshop and the final results went very well. My congratulations.
• The workshop organization went well. Congratulations.
• Objectives. Were achieved.
• The whole proceedings of the workshop were well organized.
• Experience and content of presentation by experts.
• Enjoyed every bit of the discussion and contacts with colleagues, and differences of thinking.
• Overall organization of the workshop. Excellent.
• The workshop is really an eye-opener. Super!
• Meals were excellent.
• My expectations have been more than fulfilled.
• Very good facilitation.
• Materials organization and the workshop in general.

4. What did not go well:

• Time was too short yet there was a lot to be covered.
• No `tour' guide for the field excursion: couldn't find way to Embu.
• Excursion not well organized, but no problem.
• Time was too brief; no time for a little fun, e.g. safari tour.
• Excursion to Embu was not well organized. Participants were left in the hands of the commercial drivers.

5. Needs improvement

• Two weeks would be more appropriate.
• Better arrangements (logistics) for field excursion.
• Next time a little more time for socializing.
• You have to define what it is that the current initiatives are doing to the negative effects of secondary forests.
• The workshop was well organized; however, secondary forest is a secondary need for many countries, the primary issue is sustainable forest management.