Skip to main content

youth

LESSON

Lesson Learned: Cultivating Democratic Leaders from Marginalized Groups in Thailand

An unanticipated outcome of the project was the impact on young people of being brought together from the four different regions. The opportunity to move outside their own area of concern and experience differences and similarities among other young people was mentioned by several participants as the most memorable aspect of the project.
Project Partner
The Asia Foundation
Project Description
The project was designed to engage young people from marginalized populations in four regions of Thailand, to empower them to voice their needs, access their rights, participate in political processes, and improve their lives and communities. The grantee set out to create new leaders among young people to lead actions in the disenfranchised communities. While the project supported the implementing partners financially and to a lesser extent with expertise, it did not demonstrate significant added-value in the area of democratic development. The trainees were by and large already engaged in development work in their communities and, once the project ended, the partners and the young people continued as before. The project designers would have been more aware of this, and potentially had a chance to rethink the relevance of the design, if they had reviewed existing and earlier practice in this area, and had considered in more depth the way NGOs in the regions work and from where they get their funding. The project fell into the trap of becoming, essentially, a short-term provider of funds.
Evaluation Date
December 2010
Country
LESSON

Lesson Learned: Cultivating Democratic Leaders from Marginalized Groups in Thailand

Raising expectations of young people and then leaving them unmet because there is no follow-up is bad practice. Building sustainability into actions that depend on a group that is by nature evolving and likely to move on is also difficult. Consulting young people and involving them in project design, monitoring and evaluation may help. Set up “buddy” systems where more senior/experienced/older youth agreed to mentor younger people not yet of an age to participate in the project formally.

Project Partner
The Asia Foundation
Project Description
The project was designed to engage young people from marginalized populations in four regions of Thailand, to empower them to voice their needs, access their rights, participate in political processes, and improve their lives and communities. The grantee set out to create new leaders among young people to lead actions in the disenfranchised communities. While the project supported the implementing partners financially and to a lesser extent with expertise, it did not demonstrate significant added-value in the area of democratic development. The trainees were by and large already engaged in development work in their communities and, once the project ended, the partners and the young people continued as before. The project designers would have been more aware of this, and potentially had a chance to rethink the relevance of the design, if they had reviewed existing and earlier practice in this area, and had considered in more depth the way NGOs in the regions work and from where they get their funding. The project fell into the trap of becoming, essentially, a short-term provider of funds.
Evaluation Date
December 2010
Country
LESSON

Lesson Learned: Cultivating Democratic Leaders from Marginalized Groups in Thailand

One criterion for selection of youth was perceived leadership ability, not their potential influence in their community nor the likely longevity of their participation in community activities.
Project Partner
The Asia Foundation
Project Description
The project was designed to engage young people from marginalized populations in four regions of Thailand, to empower them to voice their needs, access their rights, participate in political processes, and improve their lives and communities. The grantee set out to create new leaders among young people to lead actions in the disenfranchised communities. While the project supported the implementing partners financially and to a lesser extent with expertise, it did not demonstrate significant added-value in the area of democratic development. The trainees were by and large already engaged in development work in their communities and, once the project ended, the partners and the young people continued as before. The project designers would have been more aware of this, and potentially had a chance to rethink the relevance of the design, if they had reviewed existing and earlier practice in this area, and had considered in more depth the way NGOs in the regions work and from where they get their funding. The project fell into the trap of becoming, essentially, a short-term provider of funds.
Evaluation Date
December 2010
Country
LESSON

Lesson Learned: Learning and Living Democracy in Bosnia-Herzegovina

Although the project aimed to specifically address the needs of children with special needs and from Roma minorities, it struggled to identify these groups as participants since they are mostly absent from schools. Since the project strategy relied on working with official education authorities this was a weakness.
Project Partner
Democracy and Human Rights Education Center CIVITAS
Project Description
The project identified institutional educational weaknesses and proposed pragmatic approaches to address them. Overall the project was a success. The following elements contributed to the quality of the strategy: an appropriate response to the complex political and social context in the country drawn from the NGO‟s long time experience; a sound assessment of the political context based on long term partnership with education ministries in Bosnia and a good understanding of the targeted audience needs, based on the grantee’s experience of certifying teachers and their involvement in official curricula content design taught in all public schools.
Evaluation Date
September 2010
Theme