IFP Kenya Final Report .Pdf

Ford Foundation International Fellowships Program - Final Report

Kenya

March 2013.

Mount Kenya View

Table of Contents Executive Summary ...... 4 Introduction ...... 6 Target Group ...... 9 Recruitment and Selection...... 16 Program Orientation ...... 23 Pre-Academic Training (PAT) ...... 30 Placement ...... 36 Pre-Departure Orientation...... 45 The Study/Monitoring Period ...... 48 End of Fellowship/Repatriation/Re-entry ...... 55 Alumni and Related Activities ...... 57 Relationship with Other Actors in the IFP System ...... 61 IFP Policies...... 63 Communications/Public Dissemination of the IFP Model ...... 64 Program Evaluation ...... 66 Conclusion/Open Space ...... 68 Appendix: ...... 74

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Map of Kenya ...... 6 Figure 2: Number of Scholarships ...... 9 Figure 3: Distribution of Beneficiaries per Province ...... 13 Figure 4 :Year by year selection by Gender ...... 19 Figure 5: Areas of Study ...... 44 Figure 6: IFP East Africa Pre-Departure Meeting for the 9th Cohort - Nairobi, June 2011...... 45 Figure 7: Host Countries ...... 48 Figure 8: Degree Completion Rate ...... 53

Executive Summary This report looks at the different stages of the implementaion of the Ford Foundation International Fellowships Program (IFP) in Kenya over the last 12 (twelve) years. It was a great opportunity for Kenya to have been chosen as one of the countries to benefit from this program which has created great on the lives of Kenyans at indivual and group levels. As a global program operating in 22 countries, IFP‟s effectiveness is closely tied to its innovative structure: a Secretariat in New York that manages the program and sets policy guidelines, while partner organizations in 22 countries manage key aspects of the program in each local context. This decentralized architecture has enabled IFP to sustain a flexible, country-based operation sensitive to the local context. In Kenya, the program was hosted by Forum for African Women Educationalists (FAWE). FAWE is a pan-African Non-Governmental Organization working in 32 African countries to empower girls and women through gender-responsive education.

Kenya like any other third world country is still challenged in providing not only quality education to its citizenry, but provision of education to all with the most afected level being Higher Education. Majority of Kenyans. 86.4% only manage to complete primary education. Less than 50% of childrent who complete Primary School education after 8 (eight) years transit to Secondary Education and only about 12% finally make it to the public Universities. These figures although represent the national position, are much lower among the marginalized communities and groups i.e female, the poor, those living with dissabilities among others. With the foregoing background, it goes without say that Scholarships are on very high damand in Kenya and the attempt to satisfy this demand from different stakeholders still falls way too low. Therefore, any scholarship like IFP that targets the marginalized is very precious.

IFP was very focused on its target group, the marginalized individulas and groups. The program was aware that without an effective outreach plan aimed at reaching people who tended to self exclude themselves from most activities and missed out on information acceess, it was a challenge to meet its objectives. Marginalization in Kenya is characterized by different factors including Social, Political,Geographical and Economic conditions. While no single community can be devoid of any form of marginalization, marginalization as a stand alone factor could not qualify one to receive the IFP fellowship. Overcoming marginalization, leadership qualities and academic potential were all considrered in the selection process. Judging by the caliber of the alumni and the roles they are playing in the community today, we are satisfied in Kenya that the program has been very successful and has met its intended objectives of supporting the marginalized people through higher education in order to strengthen their leadership qualities.

The four levels IFP selection process has been lauded as very credible, transparent and objective by different people including some of the unsuccessful candidates. To evaluate the applicants, the Program made use of local experts, who were well versed with the country‟s educational system, development status and marginalization factors. This helped to eliminate any factors that could go unnoticed, ignored or misunderstood. The IFP selection process formed the foundation for its success story. The successive processes were anchored on the thorough

4 selection and if this stage went wrong, all the following processes would falter including the academic performance of the fellows and the overall success of IFP. It was therefore done with utmost precision.

As a program whose target group was individuals from marginalized backgrounds, measures were taken to ensure that preparations were made to enable the beneficiaries deal with any challenges which could jeopardize their chances for succeeding. This was one area that IFP was unique in comparison to other scholarship programs. The Pre Academic Training (PAT) was one element of the program that contributed immensely to its success given the background of the beneficiaries. Apart from preparations in the technical areas e.g. Computer and Language trainings, PAT also gave the beneficiaries an opportunity to start building their networks with other beneficiaries, a factor which later provided the much needed support system. They had an opportunity to relate with experts on Higher Education and on various relevant subject areas.

A program of IFP magnitude would not have succeeded without a clear and effective monitoring system to enable fellows keep on track. The close monitoring of the fellows coupled with the effectively conducted PAT and careful placement did not erase all challenges fellows experienced, a few still faced some problems but were able to receive support adequately as a result of the open and efficient communication that existed between all the partners. Contrary to expectations as a result of the program beneficiaries, IFP fellows proved to be very competitive in their academic performance and some of them graduated at the top of their classes earning them other opportunities for further studies. Coming back home for the alumni was both a success and a challenging experience. However, the support systems they had build before leaving for their studies, provided some cushion even in terms of getting jobs. The constant contacts they kept with the home office and the opportunity provided by the program to come back home for research helped to reduce the gravity of the effects of being away. With time, alumni settle down into meaningful engagements and positive contribution to the society. Today the Kenya alumni have formed and registered a national organization that they use as a vehicle to addresses national and community issues collectively. Alumni have taken part in the various ongoing processes in Kenya including the new constitutional making process and the general elections held in March 2013. They have been elected to powerful commissions and to other high offices in the country. In the 2013 general elections, IFP alumni were elected and nominated in the following positions of leadership; 1 Governor, 1 Senator, 2 Members of National assembly, 2 Women‟s Representatives, 1 County assembly speaker, 1 Deputy Governor and one member of County Assembly. IFP is proud of its alumni and see this as a continuation of the fulfillment of the IFP Vision, that of strengthening Leadership capacity of the marginalized people to enable them promote Social Justice for all. By gaining access to the highest policy making organ in the country, the alumni who represent different marginalized groups have a great opportunity to serve their communities effectively by presenting the challenges affecting them to where they can be heard and addressed. The positive impact of the IFP alumni is already being felt in Kenya at the grass root levels, at institutions of higher learning, in policy making organs and at management levels.

As IFP concludes its work in all the 22 countries it has been implemented in, the alumni are the legacy that will remain. In Kenya, a program, International Fellowship Program (IFP) East

Africa has been registered locally in order to continue engaging the highly skilled, experienced and networked alumni to further promote Social Justice.

IFP provided an opportunity for cross cultural and regional learning not only to the beneficiaries who travelled thousands of miles to get their graduate degrees, but also to the International Partners who interacted with each other, with placement partners, the secretariat in New York and the program administrators who all worked on a common goal worldwide. It was a great learning platform for everyone who associated with it. IFP has left a mark on the lives of many people who interacted with it including the selection committees, the beneficiaries, unsuccessful applicants, other stakeholders, communities reached through outreach, other scholarship programs and all.

Introduction

Figure 1: Map of Kenya

Ethnic groups: Kikuyu 22%, Luhya 14%, Luo 13%, Kalenjin 12%, Kamba 11%, Kisii 6%, Meru 6%, other African 15%, non-African (Asian, European, and Arab) 1%

Kenya is situated in East Africa and is bordered by Uganda to the West, Tanzania to the South, the Indian Ocean to the South-East, Somalia to the East, Ethiopia to the North-East, and Sudan to the North-West. It has a landmass of approximately 582,366 square kilometers. The population comprises 40 indigenous communities (each with its own mother tongue) making up approximately 97 percent of the population while the remaining 3 percent consists of immigrants from Asia, Europe and elsewhere. The country is divided into eight administrative regions or provinces, namely Central, Coast, Eastern, Nairobi, North Eastern, Nyanza, Rift Valley and Western.

In Kenya, Higher Education is still a challenge to many people. Research has revealed that Kenya Government spends up to 0.9% of its GDP and about 12.0% of its huge education budget of above Kshs. 86 billion to cover the costs of universities education. However, higher education sector is still grossly underfunded. Access to university has seriously been distorted by the policy of reducing dependence (by the public universities) on the government for funding. 45% of the students enrolled in public universities pay a full tuition fee that is over 10 times the GNI per capita of Kenya. This implies that highly qualified students from needy backgrounds are denied access at the expense of less qualified students who can afford to pay the full fees. Currently Kenya has 15 public universities and 36 private universities. The country has a comparatively low education index, implying that a big proportion of the Kenyan labor force has not attained basic education and skills and/or requisite technical skills and knowledge necessary for improved labor productivity, competitiveness and innovation. The highest level of education completed by majority of Kenyans (86.4%) is primary education, followed by secondary education (25.0%), pre-primary (9.5%), and University (1.2%).

Recent reforms in the education sector are bearing fruit. For instance, access to education at all levels, internal efficiency and gender equity in terms of access to primary education has improved nationally. However, regional disparities still exist glaringly, with low enrolment rates and poor performance in National exams observed in Arid and Semi Arid Lands (ASAL) including counties like Pokot, Turkana, Marsabit, Wajir, Suba etc and urban informal settlements. North Eastern province and Nairobi provinces continue to experience the lowest school enrolment rates. The free Primary education raises serious concerns regarding Kenya's primary education system, asking "whether the reduction of inequalities in 'access' to education has resulted in creating another type of inequality: namely, inequality in learning". Despite the increased enrolment and attendance, inequalities between the rich and poor still persist and the move towards universal primary education has resulted in more parents sending their children to private schools as reports of low educational standards within state schools emerge.

Unfortunately, access to higher education is still limited in many developing countries. In Kenya, for example, a total of only 231,000 individuals were enrolled in universities in

2010/2011, representing all age groups at the undergraduate and graduate levels. International study is reserved for a privileged few translating into the majority of Kenyans missing out of higher education. Those with financial power or the right connections can access Higher Education unlike the less fortunate members of the society. This in turn results into lack of skilled manpower and lack or very slow pace of development process in the country but more specifically amongst the marginalized groups and in Geographical areas i.e. Northern part of Kenya, Coastal region and in the informal settlements. Transition to the university level is significantly low and to graduate education even much lower in the country. In the 2006/07 academic year, 18 per cent of Form 4 students qualified for University admission but only 4.4 per cent were admitted to universities locally, representing 1.7 per cent of the students who enrolled in Standard 1 in 1994. Although the education sector in Kenya has expanded in the last ten years to see many Universities open their doors to students, the cost of attaining higher education is still way above the reach of many Kenyans and the distribution of the Institutions is skewed with focus being in the cities where services like electricity is available. This means that even if one has access to funds to pursue higher education, their Geographical location as a marginalization factor will remain an impediment to the pursuit of the same.

The provision of higher education has expanded and continues to grow. However, the issue of faculty members is becoming a concern. The qualified staffs are either concentrated at particular institutions or are overstretched trying to meet the demand by shuttling between several institutions sometimes compromising quality. Lack of funding and few faculty staff supervising a big number of students sometimes lead to delays in the completion of academic programs. This factor has seen the affluent members of the society go overseas for “quality” higher education. Higher education in Kenya therefore remains the preserve mostly of the elite members of the society. There is also a big relation between the type of basic education one receives and their transiting to higher education. Those from marginalized areas who do not access quality basic education find it a big challenge to earn grades that would propel them to higher education levels especially through the Government sponsorship which is very competitive and one has to score a mean grade of B+ and above to qualify. The few from this group who have made it to higher education, have done so mostly through staggered education system and by support from the church. Otherwise, it is a vicious cycle for the marginalized people because they start on a weak footing by receiving poor basic education, they do not make it to good Secondary schools, they then fail to make the grade B+ and above grade and miss out on Government funding yet they need it most due to their financial marginalization. It is no wander that some Geographical parts of Kenya has not made any progress towards development since Kenya gained independence fifty (50) years ago.

The Kenyan education system is one „more about schooling‟ than „education‟, it has failed to instill values, aesthetics and beliefs that are unique to the peoples orientation. Kenya‟s education system has not been able to tailor its contents to the socioeconomic and cultural realities of the

8 people capable of developing local solutions for local problems. Instead, it continues to uphold an education system that is centered on schooling rather than learning. Consequently the system has produced people who consistently look to the developed world for models of development that matches their own social and physical environment but irrelevant to Kenya. The situation is not improving because most Diploma and Technical schools that trained technicians, craftsmen and artisans, have all been converted into Universities without upgrading these courses, instead erasing them. This means that the entire graduates, who are mostly not prepared for the job market look up to managerial positions only. Political patronage and ethnicity in the education sector has also had a bearing on the distribution of educational institutions and the perpetuation of inequalities in accessing education in Kenya. The formation of higher education policy in Kenya revolves around the country‟s President. Each time a new president comes in to power, there are new implications both negative and positive to different populations. Education has thus failed in promoting equity and well being of individuals through access to opportunities; bridging the gap between male and female participation in the socio, political and economic arena; positioning the country as a strategic global player through the creation of a scientifically and technically informed labor force and in creating a sense of nationalism among its citizenry.

After 9 (nine) successful selections starting in 2001, IFP has awarded a total of 128 (one hundred and twenty eight) scholarships to Kenya. Out of these, 105(one hundred and five) are Masters and 23 (twenty three) are PhDs. 61 (sixty one) are female and 67 (sixty seven) are male.

Figure 2: Number of Awarded Scholarships

Target Group The Ford Foundation International Fellowships Program in Kenya had a very clear road map on its target group as a result of the conditions existing in the country. The focus was on the communities, groups and individuals who face a combination of factors established as causes of marginalization. Some of these challenges are; vast distances to schools, communities with low literacy levels, lack of social role models, low value of girls education, and limitations of basic schooling resources like teachers. Other factors include historical injustices, poor governance,

9 economic under-development, voicelessness, limited access to services e.g. water, sanitation etc. Discrimination of ethnic minorities, the sick (e.g. HIV and AIDS or mental cases), the disabled, and the elderly. Also gender-based traditional or religious beliefs, social displacement, poverty, unemployment, famine, limited education, poor access to basic services, information and decision making. Limited decision making, limited access to government services and social support made the conditions worse. The marginalized are pushed towards rural based agro activities and are excluded from enjoying fundamental rights, participating in active politics and engaging in viable economic activities that is supposed to better their lives.

Although some communities are marginalized than others, there is no single tribe that is lacking in any form or forms of marginalization. Even the Kikuyu tribe, who are the majority in the country and have dominated Kenya‟s political scene since independence and occupy most leadership positions in the Government and Private sectors still have many of their own facing serious forms of marginalization. There are very many Kikuyu‟s who are squatters in different parts on Kenya and face serious economic hardships. Some have faced political hardships due to retaliatory attacks from other tribes especially after elections and have lost properties and life in many instances. Still many members of the Kikuyu tribe live in the slums of major cities like Nairobi and Nakuru where school enrolment rates are as low as the most marginalized province in Kenya, North Eastern. This applies to the Kalenjin tribe also who despite occupying the agriculturally rich parts of the Rift Valley and one of their own having ruled Kenya for over 20 years as the second president of Kenya, still suffer from retrogressive cultural practices, social injustices and economic poverty.

Due to the foregoing, no ethnic community was left out as a target group although emphasis was put on particular communities known to be marginalized on almost all the identified aspects. While ethnicity, gender, poverty, geographical location amongst others were important factors of consideration, each factor was not considered as a standalone, but in relation to others and to the IFP objectives. Caution was taken to avoid the fellowship being seen as targeting specific groups i.e. the poor, women, certain ethnic groups, people with disability etc. For example, gender, especially the female from some communities was considered marginalized due to cultural practices in these communities. However, it is also a fact that some female were more privileged than their male counterparts due to opportunities they received from well wishers or the church as they grew up. The stress was therefore put on how the gender issue had contributed to an individual‟s marginalization and how it was a barrier to accessing equal rights, quality education being one of them.

The Kenyan scenario clearly presents an unbalanced playing field for access to education and specifically quality higher education. Many factors therefore went into play to ensure that the marginalized communities and individuals were adequately reached with information on the IFP fellowships. One of the key success factors of IFP is its effective outreach to ensure that as many as possible targeted people receive the right information at the right time. This is unlike

10 other scholarships like the DAAD and the Commonwealth who rely on other stakeholders to disseminate their information and also on nominations by specific organizations. This can be limiting because it does not give a chance to all deserving people to be heard. IFPs outreach strategy was important because information marginalization is the greatest impediment to achieving an objective if the right information does not reach the right people at the right time. If the target is missed at the initial stage, the successive processes will also miss the target leading to compromised program final results.

Outreach activities were designed to ensure different target groups were effectively and efficiently reached depending on their conditions. Physical visits were conducted to different geographical locations that were considered difficult to reach and would not receive information about IFP through the normal communication channels. Prior to such visits, mobilization was done by alumni, other stakeholders, provincial administration and other collaborators e.g. committee members. The visits entailed a presentation on IFP by the IP, followed by a question and answer session. Information Education Communication (IEC) materials on IFP‟s vision, mission and objectives etc were circulated to the participants. The participants included not only potential applicants, but also other members of the community who carried away the materials to share with their relatives, friends and others. Other activities involved radio talk shows in vernacular radios to reach the target groups who were located in remote areas. Special Newspaper supplements inserted in the daily Newspapers circulated in specific Geographical areas to make it easy for the targeted group to locate the messages were designed. Adverts were also posted in the national Newspapers in order to give IFP the National outlook. Working with other stakeholders operating in the marginalized or with the marginalized communities, we placed materials with such organizations to ride on their network to get IFP information to as many people as possible. We also placed our information at rural public areas like in Hospital receptions, at the Provincial administrative offices, in schools and at churches.

The local partner, who is well versed with the Kenyan socioeconomic, political scenario, in consultation with other stake holders i.e. selection committee members, other NGO representatives, the church, members of the civil society deliberated and came up with specific variables to be considered in measuring marginalization aspect of applicants. Information on marginalization in Kenya has been debated at different forums, exists in books and is a topical subject for many Kenyans including scholars, human rights organizations, development partners and the affected groups. Outreach visits conducted to different regions also confirmed the marginalization status of different communities. This was true of the visit to East Pokot where one could feel the intensity of marginalization in the air. Young drunk men, made more drunk by the extremely hot and dry weather roamed around carrying weapons ready for any attacks from their hostile neighbors. Young girls idled around the shopping centers bedecked in traditional beads ready for marriage. Only about five people had attained University education in the district as at the time of our visit. The road to the place was like the legendary road to hell with only one public transport vehicle plying it once a day through a bridge that killed nine army

11 officers a few years back. Social infrastructures like schools and health services were completely absent from the scene. The church and a few NGOs tried to bridge the gap. There is no electricity. Information does not reach the area because Newspapers have no way of reaching here. Due to lack of electricity, Televisions are rare, the only means of connection with the outside world is probably the vernacular radio because this is the language most people speak. To make it to East Pokot, we had to be escorted by two armed Administration Police officers and our fellow who carried a pistol as a result of his administrative position. This scenario was not very different from the other areas we visited e.g. Tana River, Kwale, Nyandarua, amongst others. Reports from different stakeholders provided more in-depth information into different forms of marginalization faced by different communities and groups. The above combination provided the program with a very clear picture on whom to target and how to evaluate them.

Each year, outreach activities targeted different geographical parts of the country. Focus started in the Rift Valley province, the biggest province in Kenya with some of the most marginalized communities like the Ilchamus, the Pokot, the Turkana, Rendile, Samburu, Maasai etc. The first visit was the one to East Pokot and Marigat districts. This outreach activity was successful because out of it, IFP awarded a total of four fellowships in different years. We are proud to mention that the first Ilchamus woman to earn a Master‟s Degree is a beneficiary of this outreach visit. This alumnus has done well for herself and her community by winning international awards to implement projects that are benefiting her community members. She has also remained consisted in fighting some of the cultural practices that are impeding the success of development in her community. The focus of outreach changed in order to make sure that areas considered more marginalized geographically including lack of access to information were reached effectively. As the years went by, it was important to also assess the composition of the program beneficiaries and evaluate the inclusiveness considering the country‟s ethnic communities, marginalization factors and IFPs objectives. Some of the regions lagging behind on the onset included the Coast province, Western, North Eastern and Eastern. Follow up outreach visits were organized in partnership with other stakeholder‟s e.g. provincial administration, the alumni, National Council of Churches of Kenya (NCCK) amongst others. The annual outreach refocus was also to address certain professions and sectors that were not yet well represented by the program‟s beneficiaries. This was in recognition of the fact that development interventions must be addressed comprehensively from all sectors and professions for it to succeed. In this regard, alumni and fellows from these professions i.e. public administration, good Governance and Law were encouraged to disseminate information widely to their networks. Outreach was extended to some institutions of higher learning like Strathmore University, the Government, particular civil society organizations and professional organizations like the Law society of Kenya. The strategic and targeted outreach visit yielded further good results. The much marginalized areas of Kenya e.g. Turkana, Pokot, Samburu, Maasai, Marsabit, amongst many were reached and in most of these areas, IFP scored a first by being the first program to recognize potential leaders from these areas. Not only did IFP recognize these marginalized groups and provided them with

12 scholarships, but gave them an opportunity to strengthen their leadership skills by organizing leadership training forums and enabling the beneficiaries to access some of the best Universities of the world.

Figure 3: Distribution of Beneficiaries per Province The first woman to earn a Master degree among the Rendile community is an IFP fellow. This showed the transparency and the dedication that IFP put to its work to ensure that the scholarship benefitted some of the small, marginalized and forgotten communities of Kenya. Many Kenyans have lost hope in scholarship programs because the trend has been that one has to be influential and well connected to be able to benefit from such opportunities. For IFP, the process was open, transparent and fair for everyone. As a result of this, IFP beneficiaries comprise individuals from all over Kenya but more concentrated in the regions more marginalized and shunned by other development partners due to the challenges in accessing them. Today a number of these individuals from the marginalized communities are gaining access to the Kenyan decision making organs, thanks to IFP there is hope that this will trickle down to positively impact on the marginalized communities. One of the alumni from the Ilchamus community who studied PhD in Rangeland Management has been selected to sit in the country‟s powerful Lands Commission. This is a big step forward because one main injustice in Kenya regards the issue of land distribution and ownership especially by the very rich benefiting and the very poor loosing. The Ilchamus are one of the communities this issue has highly affected because to date, they do not own any land as the land is still communally owned. Other communities considered marginalized and missing out from the Kenyan higher education sector like the Pokots, Turkanas, Bajunis, Ilchamus, Maasai, Samburu, Somalia, Gabbra, Borana , Rendile are among IFPs beneficiaries. Although it is individuals from these communities that benefitted from the scholarships, these are not just ordinary individuals. Right from the interview stage, these individuals proved that they

13 had a passion for their communities and were already addressing several challenges facing them including those beneficiaries residing in the slums of the big cities. The alumni back in the country have also proved that their passion is still with their communities by going back to them, despite the difficult living conditions and are driving forward the much needed development processes in different sectors e.g. education, good governance, economic empowerment, environment conservation amongst others. Because Development does not come from outside but from within, there are high hopes that the IFP beneficiaries are the ones to bring development to their communities of course in partnership with outsiders.

Apart from marginalization, the great focus was also put on individuals who had overcome their own marginalization and what they were doing to address the challenges they had faced in order to improve the lives of others to avoid a repeat of similar conditions. It was important to target people on these two levels because those who could not address their own challenges were viewed as unable to make it to the second level of addressing community matters and would only use the IFP opportunity to benefit themselves. This caliber of people would not help advance the course of social justice which is greater than the individual. Some candidates drew emotions by citing factors like being orphaned at advanced ages i.e. over 20 years contributing to their marginalization. Others saw lack of promotion at their work place because they were women as challenges and yet some cited their marginalized communities. Even disability on its own could not qualify one as marginalized. Yes, it was a marginalization factor, but some disabled candidates had access to the best institutions and had made good progress in life but were not contributing in any way to addressing the challenges facing the disabled community. Such cases provided the selection committee members with a clear line to draw on between the agents of social change and the self seekers. Most of the beneficiaries were focused on coming back to work with their communities to change their lives positively. Promise alone was not enough to qualify one to the scholarship. Proven track record of consistently addressing the area of interest and impact already created was a key factor. Focus on the poor urban slum dwellers, working with the youth in the environment sector to turn garbage into cash, peace builders who focused on bringing warring communities together, working with street families, women‟s empowerment, girls‟ education promotion, good governance and accountability were some of the services to the community considered on top of marginalization factors. On the contrary, there are individuals who grew up in the slums but are not bothered at all with the challenges the slum dwellers face. There are people living with different disabilities and do not see any role they can play to make the lives of their group better while others e.g. a Kenyan fellow living with Albinism are playing key roles in ensuring that those living with disabilities are accorded their full rights. Many of the above cited professions are shunned by those who have earned higher education. To find that IFP beneficiaries were interested in such areas attests to the fact that IFP target group was a very special group. The target groups were well defined and confusion was minimal. Such definitions sometimes led to selection committee taking an affirmative action to

14 ensure a balance and inclusiveness in the composition of the beneficiaries in terms of gender, regional representation, and profession areas amongst others.

IFP‟s target group came naturally and represented real life situations for the purposes for which it was established. On top of this is the fact that a society can only develop when everybody from different sectors come together to address the challenges collectively. Everyone is valuable and relevant. IFP beneficiaries come from across the board in terms of gender, professions, age, ethnicity, geographical coverage, private and public sectors. Because the evaluation was on several factors, to exclude a particular group from the target group or not depended on how the target group member met all the other selection criteria. The basis of making the decision to include or exclude a group was therefore not how the group fit in the target group, but how as an individual one had overcome marginalization and was using their skills, experience and network to address communal challenges and not personal fulfillment. Otherwise, to address a specific group without considering all the factors in totality could be counterproductive because certain groups would feel that they had the exclusive right to be considered or awarded the fellowship.

In Kenya, we are satisfied that the beneficiaries deserve the opportunities they got based on IFP‟s objective of broadening access to higher education and creating new social justice leaders? This is because of the continuous leadership recognition that our beneficiaries have continued to gain nationally and internationally. One of our own, Raphael Juma, studying Public Policy at Duke University was competitively elected to sit in the United Nations Youth Board. Willis Aggrey Otieno, a 7th Cohort Kenya beneficiary also made IFP proud by being the only winner from Africa for the prestigious 2012 Rolex Laureate not to mention those who have made it to parliament. While we may not have achieved 100% success, we are satisfied with the substantial success the program has made towards meeting its objectives. This is clearly evident in the success the fellows have achieved by excelling academically. Only one person out of the 128 (One hundred and twenty eight) selected fellows did not complete his studies. The return rate is very high, over 84%. Currently, only 17 (seventeen) alumni have not come back to Kenya with some of them enrolled in PhD and Post doctorate studies abroad. The alumni who have come back home are doing a great job both collectively and individually within their communities. The alumni association has been funded by IFP to implement a constitutional project in Kenya in sixteen (16) counties. They have made inroads in to the rural areas and have carried out educational programs at the grass roots to help people engage effectively with the new Constitution. On individual basis, Alumni have gained access to decision making levels in the country which give hope for the communities they represent. Seven (7) alumni have received funding from IFP to implement projects in their communities to address various needs amongst those communities. These are Women‟s economic empowerment amongst the Maasai women in Loitoktok, Food security amongst the Ilchamus in Marigat District, Voter Education amongst the IDPs (Internally Displaced Persons) in Molo, Youth empowerment and environment conservation in Lamu District, Environment conservation and economic empowerment in

Kakamega forest, Good Governance in Korogocho slums, Nairobi. The IFP beneficiaries represent almost all the communities in Kenya including the smallest and the most marginalized.

“I have learnt to do advocaadvocacycy at high levels, visiting the Ministers, Permanent Secretaries and other policy makers to present issues of Turkana and suggest possible solutions. This has now become part of my character. Finally, the urge to fight for the rights of the disadvantaged inin the community has influenced me me to to seek seek a aparliamentary parliamentary seat. seat With as Women this I have Representative. high hope that With I will this influence I have high the hopeimprovement that I will of influencestandards theof living improvement among the of standardspeople in ourof living county. among the people in our county. I was appointed to the Board Director for Kerio Valley Development Authority (KVDA) and

The sectors they represent are all inclusive including education, environment, agriculture and public policy amongst others. The beneficiaries‟ contribution to their communities before selection and as IFP alumni is an evidence of the program‟s success in strengthening leadership for social justice. An alumnus from the marginalized Turkana community, married at age 15 but today holding an influential leadership position in the country today had the above to say;

Although the beneficiaries are individuals who would otherwise not get access to quality higher education, they have used the opportunity granted to them well and have shown that they are as good as their counterparts with affluent backgrounds. One of the beneficiaries who studied PhD in Ohio was the recipient of the school‟s annual CSE Outstanding Student award during her year. Some of the beneficiaries are the only ones in their communities to earn graduate education and are now acting as role models. It is worth noting that almost all the beneficiaries from the marginalized communities like the Pokots, Turkana, Ilchams, Somali are back to their communities doing great work there and have not aped the good and easy lifestyles in the cities. Because these communities live in extremely hardship areas, it is only one of their own who can understand them and work amongst them. Most people, not born and bred in these communities find these conditions too harsh for their lives. Hope is in the IFP beneficiaries who through the IFP opportunity, have gained higher education, new skills, and knowledge and have managed to break the vicious cycle witnessed amongst the marginalized communities that have missed out on the opportunities for quality international education. Because such communities lack role models, are hopeless as a result of no intervention from any quarters especially the Government, lack representation in any policy making organs and are cut off from important information amongst other challenges, the alumni from these communities are looked upon with very high expectations. The alumni have not disappointed and the influential positions they are already accessing are a clear sign that change is on the way for the marginalized people.

Recruitment and Selection The IFP Kenya recruitment network consisted of Alumni, fellows, committee members, NGO network, people who had been referred by other scholarships or Social justice promoting organizations and people from institutions of higher learning. Some of the organizations that we

16 networked with in building this network are the Ford Foundation who referred to us some individuals they had worked with in the field of leadership and social justice. We also collaborated with the American Embassy in Kenya who run the Fulbright and Hubert Humphrey scholarships. We worked with academicians from the local Universities, the Ministry of Education and other sectors like education researchers. These are people from different faculties and who had experience in interviewing students and knowledge in different academic areas and conversant with the Kenyan and other countries academic systems. Practitioners from different professional fields and geographical areas formed part of the selection team. Credibility, technical expertise, regional balance, academic qualifications were some of the issues considered in the selection of the recruitment network.

The alumni played a major role during the outreach phase of the program to disseminate information to the target groups. They also served as role models and encouraged potential applicants to apply. They were the living testimony that the IFP program was run objectively and transparently without favoritism unlike many other programs which Kenyans had lost faith in e.g. due to the manner in which a lot of discrimination was practiced.

The selection process went through four different phases. The first screening started at the application stage. Somebody was responsible for receiving the applications and carried out a thorough check on whether the applicant had met all the application criteria. If any discrepancy was noticed, it was clearly noted on the package e.g. lack of all required documents, lack of a first degree, had studied abroad, citizen of a non IFP country or failure to fill out the application form fully or as required. The second level was conducted out by a team of five consultants who went through the applications and screened them further on the qualifications criteria. At this stage, technical qualifications like the number of the applicants‟ years of experience, their background in relation to target group i.e. marginalization, experience and suggested areas of study. The third selection level was the short listing committee. A team of six experts with experience and skills in various fields worked in two groups of three each. All the three members of each group evaluated each application in their lot and graded it. The top 50% of the average score for each applicant from each group was presented to form the candidates for the final face to face interview. The interview committee evaluated the applications on their proposed study areas in relation to their first degree areas and work experience. They weighed this against the applicants‟ proposed future plans. In finer details, this team evaluated the applications on their leadership contributions, community service and their impacts.

The final, face to face interview committee was made up of academicians with different professional backgrounds and development practitioners. This was very helpful because each committee member was assigned to lead in his/her area of expertise. Those who were well versed in community matters took that lead, same to committee members who were practitioners in the leadership or academic fields. The essence of forming such a committee was to create a

17 team that not only blended well, but was balanced in various areas of expertise. This team confirmed the applicants‟ written facts during the interview. They probed the applicants on their leadership and community service roles. They considered the suitability of the applicants proposed areas of study, research and if these were academically viable. Because some candidates tried to fly their communities‟, gender, or special conditions flags during the interview to gain favor, the committee made it clear to them that while it was true that the scholarships were for such groups, that alone was not adequate. The fellowship was for marginalized groups through representatives who could prove that they were working to influence such people‟s lives for the better. The onus was therefore on the candidates to evaluate themselves, prove that they had a concern for the marginalized people and show the impacts they had made to improve the lives of such people. Many candidates were well prepared for the interview and presented photos, certificates outs, publications amongst other documents as proof of the work they do and the impact they had created within their communities. The committee members due to their networks, experience and knowledge of the country and various sectors were able to probe the candidates deeply and sometimes made reference to some of the people the candidates had cited as their colleagues, supervisors, partners thereby minimizing the chances of cheating. The committee members also challenged the candidates on their lines of thought to test if what they were saying was only made up for the interview or existed in reality. The questions were not “Yes” or “No” questions, but required explanations and sometimes drawing how certain recommendations or action plans proposed by the candidates were relevant to the community, their contribution to different development agendas like the Kenyan Vision 2030 or the MDGs. It took all rounded and well informed committee members to successfully conduct this phase of the selection activity. While they confirmed most of the written information, they also found some irregularities. Leadership was one area that was misunderstood to only mean staying at the fore front. The committee members took the candidates to task on matters to do with leadership succession, dictatorship versus leadership, empowering others as leaders amongst other issues. While such lines of interviewing were meant to evaluate the candidates, it also provided an opportunity for the candidates both successful and unsuccessful to think more deeply about leadership. Applicants were given a chance to ask any questions at this level and the team provided clarification. This committee recommended to IFP the candidates they found suitable for the award of the fellowships.

The selection stages were developed to enable each team work efficiently and effectively given the big number of applicants received each year. Kenya received an average of 1000 (One thousand) applicants each year. It was important not to burden one committee with too much work which could jeopardize the quality of the beneficiaries. We therefore considered the attributes for evaluation and categorized these at different levels thereby coming up with the different levels of committees. Each stage of the interviewing process was important because it was used to sieve the applicants using the tools developed to evaluate different important

18 variables. Consultations with each committee at the beginning and at the end of each session led to an improvement of the selection process each year.

Figure 4 : Selection per year per Gender Over the years, the selection process changed time and again especially on the content of the interview questions and how they were structured. In some instances, more questions were included due to observations from the committee members. The committee members also changed over time with some rotating between the short-listing and interview committees and new ones coming in after serving a maximum period of three years. Some committee members also left after serving one or two years without attaining the three years maximum period due to other commitments and reasons. Overall, the committee members contributed a lot of input to the selection process bringing in a lot of expertise and ideas from other programs.

The basis of developing the scoring and ranking process at each stage was the consideration of the target group‟s qualities and the programs objectives. Under target group, the applicants‟ background and all factors influencing it were put into consideration including all the challenges they faced and how they dealt with them. These facts enabled the committee to evaluate the level of marginalization and whether an applicant was stuck in his/her marginalization or had overcome it and was now helping others to counter their challenges at individual and group level. This proved a lot about the applicant, i.e. their experience with marginalization and preparedness to support other people. The candidate‟s academic backgrounds, challenges and achievements were evaluated as well as their proposed areas of study. These were important because they were a pointer towards preparedness for graduate study. Leadership and community service contribution and impact including voluntarism were viewed as some of the key aspects of promoting social justice and hence were closely examined. Requirements like academic capability, leadership and community service were factored in the ranking process. How well

19 their proposed areas of study, past experience and future plans were webbed was a matter of great evaluation. All the above made an IFP target group and it was not possible to sacrifice any part of it. It was this clarity that contributed to the overall success of the program at the end of the day.

Some of the instruments used during the selection process included tools like guiding questions which were developed for use by the interviewing panel to probe the interviewees. Scoring sheet for each applicant was developed including a section for scoring the candidate and for providing comments about the candidate by the interviewer. This was very useful in understanding the applicant much better and for future reference. The development of these tools was done before the start of each selection process. The first few hours of each selection activity was used for induction. The IFP staff and continuing committee members took the new members through the selection tools and procedures. The instruments were shared, discussed and comments provided. This process led to reviews on the tools used during the previous years depending on the experiences the committee had. It is also at this stage that the committee members divided up their roles for the interview session. The interviewing committee assigned themselves areas in the interview tool where they had expertise in. The same process to review the interview tools also took place after each interview process. The team took a few hours to deliberate on the process and made changes where necessary. Throughout the three selection stages, a soft copy of the tools and access to a printer was made available to effect changes and make the tools ready for use during the selection process. Over time, as new issues arose, the content of the tools changed. Some aspects of the selection were moved from one committee to another for either ease of address or the suitable stage to capture particular issues. Some changes took place after having access to other International Partners‟ tools and recognizing some value addition approaches. Some areas of the tools were merged and others split for ease of candidates‟ effective evaluation. For the years that the program did not award PhD fellowships, the tools were adjusted to capture this aspect.

The interview protocols were designed to make the applicants feel at ease with the panelists. They were also made to be interactive in order to get the best out of the applicants. The panelists agreed amongst themselves who would take responsibility for each section. They also chose their chairman who was responsible for welcoming the interviewees and settling them down before introducing the other panel members. All these were in recognition of the caliber of candidates we were dealing with. Most of them were from the marginalized communities, based in the rural set ups and were hence intimidated by the city environment and if not well handled, would fail to perform to their maximum capacity. Each interviewee was allocated equal time for the interview which followed an agreed sequence. After the interview of each applicant, time was allocated for deliberating each applicant before another interviewee was led into the room. To ensure the process ran smoothly and on schedule, there was a time keeper throughout the exercise. Over time, allocation of each set of questions changed as the panelists discovered more

20 effective and efficient ways of asking questions and probing the interviewees. The committee member taking a lead on each section of the tool changed as the panelists realized each other‟s strengths in different areas or as some members left and others joined.

The members of the selection panel were either referred by other stakeholders like the Ford Foundation, US Embassy or the British Council and other NGOs in the field of Social Justice, Leadership and Higher Education. Some were referred by other panelists and others are public figures known for their stand and for promoting social justice in different areas. Some committee members were referred from institutions of higher learning. The panelists‟ composition was representative of the Kenya‟s ethnic communities and different academic, professional and development sectors. Their academic backgrounds, skills and experiences in different areas were key to their inclusion into the panel. They had to be people of proven credibility, willing to avail themselves for the period of the exercise and believed in the vision of IFP. Gender balance was strongly considered as well as experience with selection and interviewing procedures. Sometime, it was a challenge to balance all these at a time hence the justification to rotate some committee members within the different committees in different years.

The IFP selection process, to quote from some beneficiaries and those who did not qualify it was described as “dignifying, objective and empowering”. Some compelling feedback came from the beneficiaries later who expressed their gratitude for having been treated well and with dignity. It was a surprise to receive feedback from those who did not make it through. As we called them to give them the “negative” response, some said that they were very grateful for having been invited to such an interview. Some said they were humbled by the opportunity to appear before such a dignified interview panel and had the opportunity to learn something new. They were surprised at how the panel treated them with dignity and respect. They felt empowered and were convinced that IFP was an empowering program giving equal opportunity to everyone. The IFP selection process was never meant to intimidate, but to provide the best environment to enable interviewees to give their best. Because most applicants are marginalized people who lack exposure, this fact was key to ensure the target group was attained. The set up, in a hotel environment also gave the exercise an informal friendly atmosphere, but at the same time, formal enough to discuss important matters. The panelists consisted of experienced people who were all rounded both in academics, professions and social issues. The exercise was therefore not an academic evaluation process only, but rather an opportunity for one to state their contribution to the society with the academic qualifications they achieved as opposed to a show of academic prowess and the ability to achieve more of the same. The restrictions to deter candidates from competing for IFP were minimal as opposed to other scholarships like DAAD, Chevening, Commonwealth, and Full Bright who target particular age groups, high academic achievements and prior acceptance to institutions of leaning.

The most effective outreach method to target-group areas was physical visits. This was so because it provided an opportunity for people to ask questions and hear more about IFP. During such visits, IEC (Information, Education, and Communication) materials were distributed as a long time reminder of the program. Contacts were exchanged for follow-up. Outreach activities organized by alumni were also effective because of the proof the alumni themselves provided of having benefitted from IFP despite not having any Godfathers in the program. The alumni proved that one could go abroad to study and come back and still work with and among their people. Loose inserts of IFP materials into the daily newspapers for circulation in particular geographical areas also proved effective. This is because the loose insert is more conspicuous than the normal newspaper pages. This aroused curiosity and hence interest.

There was no direct approach to potential candidates unless such candidates were people who failed to make it in the first attempt and were willing to reapply. If they were good candidates, who probably were dropped due to affirmative action by the committee members, we encouraged them to try again and made them understand that the process is transparent and depended on how one performed. Also if such candidates were referred by a beneficiary, panelist or anyone else who had heard about or interacted with IFP, we encourage them to apply but tell them that they would be considered alongside other applicants in a transparent selection process. By being transparent on the beneficiaries, we were able to quell any reservations or doubts in the minds of the target group and applicants. However, the alumni and fellows encouraged many people whom they had interacted with in different parts of Kenya to apply. The overall rule was to consider everyone equally whether they were referred by alumni, fellows other partners or committee members.

Alumni were mainly involved during the outreach stage of the IFP selection process. This was encouraging because the alumni were able to demonstrate that IFP was a nonpartisan, transparent program that had a genuine interest on the marginalized communities. It reduced doubts it the minds of prospective applicants that the fellowships would only be given to those who had connections with the program officials. The number of targeted candidates increased over the years because the alumni were able to explain to the potential candidates the requirements thereby minimizing on the irrelevant applications i.e. those who did not meet all the requirements. The outreach that the IFP staff conducted in different parts of Kenya provided an opportunity for many people to carry out self assessment before applying to IFP. However, towards the end of the program, it was felt that some applications could have been made with the assistance of past beneficiaries so as to impress the selection panelists. The good news was that such candidates contradicted themselves during the face to face interviews and were not able to defend the information they had provided in writing leading to their disqualification. All the stages of the selection process had great value and would not be eliminated but re- enforced to be more effective and efficient e.g. carrying out background checks on the finalists would help reveal any underlying factors which could not be captured during the face to face interview. It

22 was also important to vary the tools every year to avoid some candidate mastering the trend and having an advantage over the rest especially repeat candidates or candidates who are familiar with some beneficiaries.

There were challenges in identifying the selection members. Because most panel members are busy people responsible for diverse matters, at times it was a little challenging to have them commit themselves for an exercise or activity. On some occasions, it took a lot of discussions to let a panelist see things through the IFP lens. Some panelists came to IFP with the mindset of other scholarship programs and wanted to focus i.e. on academic excellence which was not the only important factor IFP focuses on. Some did not connect higher education and leadership or social commitment easily. Most panelists were however committed and the support they provided to IFP is invaluable. The successful panel members appreciated the work of IFP and took time to understand the target group that IFP was dealing with and hence the “special” treatment some required. They were willing to dedicate their time to the process. They were also mostly highly experienced people in interview processes not only for academic evaluations but for other achievements. They were also people who had experience with development programs especially in remote and marginalized areas. The least successful panel members did not appreciate the fact that IFP was dealing with a special group, those who had been marginalized by different factors probably since birth. They did not understand why the program was giving a chance to people who were not top academic achievers. They failed to recognize the new term of “academic excellence” according to IFP criteria which encompassed leadership and community service. Such panel members did not dedicate their time to understand IFP in totality. They failed to make a clear difference between IFP and other mainstream academic oriented scholarship programs. Such panelists, especially those who could not adopt served only one term and were not re-invited to serve n the panel.

Program Orientation The first orientation meeting to introduce Fellows Elect (FEs) to the project was characterized by curiosity, high expectations and anxiety. All these were caused by the fact that some FEs did not believe that they could win a scholarship without having any connections with anyone at IFP and so they thought the deal was too good to be true and were anxious to hear more facts. Others who had heard about the program from people who had benefitted from it had very high expectations. Although the meetings started with every Fellow Elect (FE) keeping to themselves because everyone was almost a stranger, after initial detailed introductions, the FEs started feeling like a family and wanted to know more about each other. Because Kenya is a multi ethnic community which creates mistrust between different communities, this was not an exception during the IFP orientation. At the beginning for instance it was a challenge to bring together people from the Pokot, Turkana and Marakwet communities who are enemies and have been cattle rustling each other since time immemorial to understand that at IFP we were one family. Interestingly, later on, these fellows embraced each other and were seeing themselves as

23 being in the right position to bring harmony between their hostile communities, a factor that had potential to go beyond the Kenyan borders into Tanzania and Uganda where pastoralist communities also live. By the end of the activity, FEs exchanged contacts, had discovered who amongst themselves had strength or skills in what areas and how they could support each other. In short, they formed a strong cohort. During this activity dubbed Needs Assessment, fellows were introduced to IFP staff, policies, processes and different key partners. It is during this activity that fellows are briefed on different responsibilities of partners and themselves. They are assessed for preparedness to take up graduate studies and are introduced to different study regions and application procedures. Specialist in Academics, placement, team building and leadership are invited to strengthen FEs capacities in these areas. The FEs get a one on one session with academic advisors in their particular study areas. Alumni are invited to provide guidance and support to the FEs as they form, sharpen and finalize their Study objectives and future plans. A lot of contacts are made during this activity including between FEs and academic or placement advisors for further consultations. By the end of the activity, the FEs, Alumni, IFP Staff, subject experts and education experts feel like they have known each other for a long time and are ready to provide the much needed support during this initial stage of the fellowship process.

The topics covered during this early and very important meeting were; - Orientation into IFP: The IFP Kenya staff made a detailed presentation to the FEs on the IFP Program, its History, Policies, Vision, and Objectives. This was to enable FEs know what they were getting into at an early stage in order to manage their expectations. - Roles and Responsibilities of different Stakeholders: This was important because FEs needed to know what is expected of them, other partners and whom they needed to contact for various issues. - Fellows Handbook highlights: This session covered the important highlights in the FEs handbook that FEs needed to familiarize themselves with from the beginning of their Fellowship period - Leadership Session: Experts in Leadership took the FEs through Leadership trainings and challenged them into looking at themselves as leaders and asking themselves what type of leaders they were especially to their communities. - Computer Needs Assessment: FEs were evaluated on their preparedness to take graduate studies in a developed world where instruction was through the use of Computer. The evaluation focused on Proficiency in various Computer packages. A report detailing the findings was provided at the end of the assessment which enabled IFP to design a comprehensive PAT support to the FEs. - English language proficiency assessment: This assessment enabled FEs destined for different study regions to undertake the relevant language tests required for admission to graduate schools in the respective regions i.e. FEs to the United States of America took GRE and Toefl and those to the UK sat for IELTS. - Study Objectives and Future Plans setting: During the Needs Assessment period, the FEs had a chance to discuss their study objectives, future career plans and how this fitted in with their

current job experience on a one to one basis with the Career advisors. At this point, the FEs had the benefit of discovering which study regions or schools address their study areas effectively at the end of the activity. FEs left with enough information to enable them choose schools to apply to. - Options of studying in different regions worldwide: Detailed information about studying in the respective regions was presented to the FEs by specialists from different study regions. Other information provided included the geography and life style in different study regions. Information on Cluster and SUPs and their benefits was shared with the FEs. IFP staff took the FEs through the policy on applying to three schools in one region abroad and one in- region or in-country. A lot of stress was put on academic institutions that met the study objectives of the FEs and not world famous institutions. Information on Strategic Partner Universities (SUPS) and cluster Universities was also circulated to help the FEs make choices. - Application process and timeline: The IFP University application form was provided to the FEs three weeks before the meeting to enable them familiarize themselves with the document. During the meeting, the FEs were taken through a step-by-step process about filling the form.

Below are some of the practices and procedures used to assess the academic needs of the Fellows; - Computer Needs Assessment: IT Experts carried out a one on one hands on computer proficiency assessment on all the FEs. The programs the FEs were tested on included Microsoft Windows, Internet use, Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel and Microsoft Power Point. A report of this determined the areas that PAT focused on in order to enable the FEs settle fast upon the start of their studies and succeed in their graduate work. - English language proficiency assessment: After consultations with the British Council, American Education Advising Center and Australian Studies Institute (AUSI) in conjunction with the Australian Education consultants, the FEs were divided into two categories for purpose of undertaking language tests. The group wishing to join North American and Canada Universities were advised to take the TOEFL and GRE tests. Those planning to go to Australia and United Kingdom were advised to take IELTS test. This was because different regions required specific language test qualifications. - Study Objectives and Future Plans setting: FEs were categorized into their broad areas of specialization i.e. Law, Development, Medicine, Environment, Agro-forestry and Education, Good Governance etc. Subject experts for each study areas discussed with FEs their proposed study objectives and future plans. IFP Kenya linked up the FEs to the professionals in their respective areas of specializations to assist them to continue clearly articulating and sharpening their study objectives. The FEs were also encouraged to consult with other professionals and academicians in their respective fields of study

Under educational advising, the following topics were addressed - Best fit institutions as opposed to famous world renowned institutions. - Study Objectives in line with first degree, work experience and future plans - Focus on academic programs and institutions that meet study objectives as opposed to world famous institutions which lacked programs for the FEs specific study areas.

- Special training to enable the FEs settle and succeed academically i.e. computer and research skills, report writing and presentation skills, special needs i.e. for those who are visually challenged - Criteria and requirements for admission to different programs at different institutions and regions. - System of studying in the proposed study regions as opposed to the one in Kenya. Topics like high use of IT for class work, class participation, grading systems, length of academic programs were also discussed. - For PhDs, it was important for FEs to confirm a supervisor willing to work with them on their topic of research before joining the institution. - SUPs and Cluster Universities and their benefits to fellows and to IFP in general.

Computer proficiency was conducted on a one on one basis. Language training and testing was provided to all the FEs as well as Report Writing, Presentation and Research Skills training. During this process, in order to attain professional and effective results, the program worked both with advisors and institutions. The Intuitions included the British Council, Nairobi office who provided IELTS training and testing to the FEs. We also worked with Uniserve Ltd who apart from providing information on studying in the UK also supported the fellows with details of institutions in the UK, their programs and the general application and visa processes. For FEs wishing to study in the United States, we worked with the – US Embassy in Nairobi, specifically the Educational Advising Centre. They provided details on studying in the USA focusing more on academic matters but also on non academic issues that influence ones academic life. They provided detailed materials on all Institutions of higher learning in the USA, their grading on different courses, admission requirements, admission dates amongst others. For FEs who wanted to study in Australia, Australian Education Consultants - AEC an organization that represents a number of top Universities in Australia provided the relevant information. They however did not limit their presentation to the Universities they represented only, but included all the Institutions in Australia. AEC also provided training and testing of IELTS and supported the fellows at the visa processing stage. Assessment of Proficiency in Computer use was conducted by Comsat Technologies and later on by Computer Pride Ltd, local companies who conducted one on one meetings with each FE to assess their computer proficiency skills and recommend training that would enable the FEs to take their academic work and other communication needs with ease once they go abroad.

For external advisors, we worked with many professionals i.e. Professor Kimani Njogu, Dr Clara Momanyi, the late Professor Mary Omosa, Mr John Nyerere, Professor Justus Mbae, Mr Ken Wakia(American Embassy), Dr Marie Nelson(American Educational Advising Centre), Mr Mahul Shah (AEC), Dr Amin Ibrahim (Uniserve), Mr Omele Mutanyi, Mr Timothy Okech, Dr Francis Wambalaba, Dr Tom Onditi, and a number of alumni just to mention a few. The qualities of the external advisors included academic qualifications and practical experience in the areas of

26 interest to particular cohorts (study areas). The experts possessed experience and knowledge of international education (studying abroad) and student advising specifically on course selections. The advisors also possessed leadership and group dynamics skills training. For Computer Proficiency, we required an organization with detailed experience in IT skills training and assessment but with enough infrastructure and willingness to organize training to our FEs that was tailor made for them to suit their busy schedule and age. For study region advisors, the program identified advisors who were fluent in University application requirements, visa processes, living abroad, and language testing.

For advising purposes, the Kenya office developed some new tools e.g. a data base of advisors that included the advisors CVs. In conjunction with IIE, information was updated regarding the SUPS and cluster Universities every year. Power point presentations on information regarding University application procedures including grades requirements, language tests requirements, application deadlines, etc was shared with the FEs. Fellows and alumni contacts were provided to enable the FEs to contact the alumni as necessary. Each year, the alumni who presented firsthand experience of IFP were involved in advising FEs during Needs Assessment and later during Pre-Departure orientation. They shared their experiences during their stay abroad, both academic and social. It was an advantage for FEs to hear from alumni and fellows who were back home to carry out research because this encouraged them and gave them more hope and confidence to look forward to the beginning of their studies. This activity enabled the FEs to prepare themselves for the challenges of leaving home and of going to a new environment. The alumni supported the FEs with formulating their study objectives especially those who had studied or were studying similar courses as the ones the FEs planned to pursue. The alumni presence made the scholarship more realistic to the FEs. The alumni started attending Needs Assessment and Pre-departure meeting in 2005. The program having started in 2001, there were no alumni back in the country up to 2004. In 2004, East Africa did not carry out any selection.

The selection committee members became mentors/advisors for the FEs beyond the first meeting. FEs were encouraged to continue contacting the advisors for any issues as need arose. As the FEs continued to sharpen their study objectives and the selection of academic programs and institutions got underway, they also continued to consult the relevant advisors who became their mentors. The advising and mentoring sometimes continued up to when fellows leave the country and during their study period. It also sometimes digressed to address personal matters or challenges experienced by fellows at their new environments. Some alumni kept their contacts with the advisors whom they met during the first meeting and continued to consult them on various matters both academic and non academic and have extended this to professional levels. One of the alumni worked with an advisor she met during Needs assessment to work on her PhD proposal long after finishing her Masters in the US through IFP. So the bond made with the advisors and other stakeholders can last long and extend to other areas of mutual interest not originally planned.

There were however some challenges due to the wide range of academic fields and disciplines covered by the fellows. These challenges included meeting the objectives, needs and expectations of people from a wide range of background. The FEs expectations included academics, personal and training needs. Some fellows looked forward to joining the world‟s top institutions which they thought would meet their study objective needs apart from offering them prestige. Others wanted specialized trainings e.g. PhD fellows demanded specialized training in their specific areas of research to enable them succeed. Others could not relate their past experience, first degrees and work experience to their proposed areas of study and study objectives and wanted to take the opportunity to venture into new areas. Some chose certain study regions due to other reasons e.g. to follow their relations or friends who had been to these institutions and forgetting the main purposes that was academic. To address such challenges, it was important to effectively communicate the facts to the FEs on what the scholarship offered and its expectations from them on the onset. This was to ensure that any perceived benefits whether rumored or misunderstood were managed in good time. The local IFP staff took the FEs through the Fellows Handbook in details order to simplify and make FEs understand their responsibilities and other partners in details. FEs were also provided with copies of the Handbook during the first meeting to give them ample time to read and familiarize themselves with the facts right on the onset. Any communication to the FEs was done clearly in writing leaving no room for ambiguity. IFP staff also offered the FEs a lot of room for discussions and to seek any clarifications. The alumni provided a lot of support during this period having gone through a similar experience although care had to be taken because some of the alumni could be sources of wrong information especially where fellows wanted to compare themselves with others.

Initially the orientation meetings started by bringing all FEs from the East African region together. This was in order to; minimize the number of orientation meetings to be held in each country, to benefit from the regional expertise of the different resource people and to start introducing the cohort members to each other on a regional basis. However, this had its challenges because it proved difficult to meet all the objectives of the meeting which turned out to be too demanding due to the big numbers. This led to the redesign of the meetings to be held at country levels enabling FEs an opportunity to be introduced to the Program policies, University application procedures and requirements, PAT evaluation, introduction to each other amongst other introductory details. This way, FEs were more ready to exchange ideas at a regional level when they met during Pre-Departure meetings later and just before they departed to their Universities. Bringing FEs together during orientation revealed that despite the marginalized backgrounds of the FEs, they had a lot of potential in them and had knowledge and experience in different areas which were complementary. FEs were from a wide range of geographical locations, professions, backgrounds and organizations. The program therefore created an opportunity for all the FEs to express themselves freely as they introduced themselves

28 to each other. As a result of knowing each other, the FEs became more relaxed and started to talk about themselves clearly bringing out their strengths, fears, experiences, challenges, amongst others. This exercise also enabled the program to learn about the FEs and informed the way we dealt with them thereafter. With the details about the FEs, we were able to use FEs as a resource to one another. Those who had strength in certain areas i.e. IT would later assist others during Computer Proficiency training. Those with knowledge in certain subject areas assisted each other in formulating or finalizing their Study Objectives. The office also had a chance to get information that was important on advising the FEs regarding Study regions.

To be more effective in assessing each FEs academic needs and skills level, different strategies were used. For the FEs academic gap, an expert in that particular subject area was involved in the process. For any identified issues, a discussion and probing was done in order to dig up the causes. Coupled with the FEs certificates and other educational testimonials, an FE‟s potential was established. For other skills, engaging the FEs on different subject matters on group or individual basis provided a good window to evaluate this. Leadership skills came out clearly during discussions as well as interpersonal skills. There are those FE who willingly volunteered information during the meeting, those who volunteered to carry out group assignments and those who engaged the staff and the experts on different issues. Others appeared as introverts and this gave us a clear indication of how to deal with individual FEs as time went by. Listening, Communication, People Management, Motivation, Negotiation skills were easy to evaluate during the group meetings. Although a tool was developed to evaluate the FEs Computer Proficiency skill, at the end of the day, all FEs went through the Computer Skills training because the assessment discovered that some of the knowledge and skills the FEs possessed was not professionally acquired and needed to be re-enforced or polished. Other skills like Research, Report Writing and Presentation skills were offered to all the FEs as well as Language training and testing.

Some areas were difficult to assess e.g. intercultural skills, adaptability to an international educational environment amongst others although some information i.e. knowledge on the kind of organization one worked in provided some light. Some FEs worked in multicultural organizations, had had an opportunity to travel on work related assignments and so had an experience with multicultural environments. Some people had never left their regions since birth which posed a challenge to cultural co-existence especially if they were not adoptive. These type of people were born, went to school, college and were working at the same geographical locations. They had not had a chance to interact with people outside their regions, leave alone country. Other skills like open mindedness and non judgmental, adaptability in view of their ability to adapt to their new study environments, conscientious, determination, honesty, perseverance which were important for the smooth execution of the program‟s mandate were not very easy to assess because these skills can take a long time to manifest in one‟s outward characteristics. However, the interaction provided a great opportunity to learn a lot about the FEs

29 that helped in deciding the kind of support one required and the study region one was most likely to succeed academically. At the conclusion of the exercise, the FEs interacted freely, exchanged contacts, understood IFP better, learnt about their expectations and felt more confident towards the scholarship. IFP staff got a good idea on the cohort members that helped to devise strategies to provide effective support to the FEs. There were no major serious academic gaps identified during Needs Assessment since the application and selection processes were thorough in addressing all the areas. Minor cases e.g. FEs not able to get academic courses with similar names as their endorsed areas of study were resolved by the academic advisors. Some FEs felt that their study objectives could only be met by dual degree programs that IFP did not support, but all these were well addressed after extensive consultation with the academic advisors.

Pre-Academic Training (PAT) The Pre Academic Training (PAT) in Kenya covered three main areas. These were the areas identified during Needs Assessment as important to FEs graduate studies success. Specifically they were, Computer Proficiency, Language Tests and Report Writing, Presentation and Research Skills. The trainings were held for all the FEs in one central place. The objectives of the PAT trainings were mainly to bring up the FEs competency in the above mentioned three areas to enable them get admission to graduate programs at different institutions. The other objective was to give the FEs relevant skills necessary for taking up graduate studies, stay in touch with other FEs and meet their fellowship obligations both academic and other areas. The activities also acted as continuous cohort building forums for members of each cohort.

As mentioned above, the three main areas covered were, Computer Proficiency – Microsoft Word, Excel, Power Point, Windows, Introduction to SPSS and Internet Use. The second subject was Report writing, presentation and research skills. The third area was Language tests comprising GRE and TOEFL training and exams for those wishing to study in the USA and IELTS for those who chose to study in the UK and Australia. Over the years the areas addressed during PAT changed. From the beginning of the program in 2001 up to the 6th Cohort, only two trainings were offered. These were Computer Proficiency and Language tests. The Computer Proficiency training initially did not include the Introduction to SPSS training nor Power Point. These packages were included as part of Computer Proficiency training as a result of feedback from the fellows who felt these packages would enable them to analyze their data with ease during research and help them to do presentations in class, at workshops and in conferences. The Research, Report Writing and Presentation Skills training was also included later on as part of PAT. This was also due to feedback from FEs on the benefit of the training to their class participation and assignment completion.

The trainings were conducted in a centralized place for all the cohort members. This was to enable the FEs to support each other in their areas of strength and also to enable the cohort to continue strengthening nationally before going out to start meeting other cohort members from other countries or regions. However, during the actual trainings, the trainers paid attention to individual needs per the report of the Needs assessment especially members realized as slow learners or facing challenges in grasping the concepts.

Training for Language tests were provided by different organizations. One group provided training for GRE and TOEFL and the other trained in the area of IELTS. The British Council and AEC (Australian Educational Centre) were the main trainers for IELTS. They also tested the FEs on the same. The two organizations were selected because they were the institutions mandated to provide training and testing of IELTS in Kenya. GRE and TOEFL presented some challenges as there were too many institutions proving training, some of which were not credible. The testing centers were however standard. A number of organizations were used for testing starting with American Educational Advising Centre which was chosen because of its experience in training and testing, its relationship to the American Embassy and other built in benefits like students advising services and visa information. Due to feedback from the FEs on the location of the institution and the big number of students they were serving, the training was relocated to Abass Computers that had many years of training and testing of GRE and TOEFL. The training institutions were also selected due to their willingness to block off a two weeks period to attend to IFP FEs only without interference from any other trainees. This worked well for the FEs who were able to concentrate on the training, took the exams and got back to their work stations as planned without any delays.

Computer training was conducted by two main training institutions. COMSAT Technologies and later Computer Pride when COMSAT closed their training unit. Both were chosen due to their experience in IT trainings and their certification by international bodies on IT packages training. The willingness of the institutions to provide a tailor made program for IFP FEs within a specified time frame was also considered. This included specialized training for those with visual impairment including one fellow from Uganda with visual impairment who had to come to Nairobi for his computer training. This was very important because IFP Fellows are mature learners, some very marginalized in the area of IT use, but also very busy in their community and work responsibly. It would also have been intimidating to put IFP fellows in normal computing classes with young boys and girls who are not only conversant with computers, but could look down upon the FEs for being backward in an area viewed as widely spread in this day and age.

Overall, PAT lasted for a total period of five and a half weeks or thirty nine days excluding travel time. The trainings were held for all the cohort members in one central place. Language Tests was divided into two categories. Those who wished to study in the USA attended a two weeks training before taking the GRE and Toefl exams. The two weeks training changed

31 midway to include basic computer training to enable the FEs to take the exams which evolved from a hand written to a computer and internet based exam. For IELTS, fellows attended two days training and a two day exam period. Report Writing, Presentation and Research Skills was conducted over a four day period for all the FEs Centrally. The PAT process was well monitored both by the facilitators and the IFP staff. The training institution carried out assessments after the training and provided certificates and reports. Take away materials were provided at the end of the training as reference materials. The trainers also carried out an evaluation of the fellows opinions on the trainings. IFP Kenya Pre- Academic Training Schedule

Training Period Duration Areas Covered A. Language Tests: GRE November (preceding Two Weeks -Basic Computer to enable fellows take up the and Toefl the year of placement) Computer and Internet based exams -Training and Exams taking.

Language Tests: IELTS Two days -Training and exam taking

B. Effective February Four Days -Effective Communication Communication, -Effective Report Writing Report Writing, -Effective Presentation Presentation and -Research Skills Research Skills: C. Computer Proficiency April Three Weeks - Microsoft word Training - Microsoft Excel - Microsoft PowerPoint - Operating Microsoft Windows -Internet Communications with windows Tools - Introduction to SPSS

IFP Kenya Pre- Academic Training Schedule

PAT training played a key role in the successful placement process and general academic success of fellows. The training prepared the FEs in all areas for the placement process. The Language tests preparations and testing enabled FEs to meet different Universities admission requirements and specifically to particular courses. Fellows also offered support to each other in terms of choosing study regions, institutions and courses. The academic advisors provided the FEs with comprehensive information on different study regions, academic institutions and their specialties enabling the FEs to make informed choices on the same. PAT gave the FEs skills that they needed to succeed academically i.e. I.T, Research, Report Writing and Presentations skills. These enabled FEs to settle quickly in to their academic activities instead of spending a lot of time to acquire them.

Feedback from fellows and alumni provided some of the new strategies incorporated in the subsequent PAT programs. Unfortunately one of the Kenyan fellows who did not complete his studies blamed his failure on lack of good computer skills. According to him, he continuously

32 failed to meet assignments submission deadlines because he was not able to retrieve the assignment from the system, did not know how to register for courses online and was not able to submit assignments online either. This incident led to further revision of the Computer Proficiency training to include more areas and to be more intensive. Updates from the training institutions on the requirements and new trends in the market regarding different courses were incorporated into the training. Consultation with other partners also provided some new thoughts into the PAT process. These led to the inclusion of new topics and subjects during PAT activity. On Language tests, the mode of writing the exams changed from Free Hand writing to computer and internet based exams. It therefore forced the FEs who wanted to study in the US, and needed to take GRE and TOEFL exams to go through basic computer training first before taking the language exam. If FEs failed to make good scores as these would deter them from getting admission to the schools of their choice, an assessment was carried out to determine the reason for the dismal performance and the matter addressed.

During the In-county PAT training, some of the challenges in designing and delivering the training were lack of knowledge on qualified institutions to provide training during the early years of the program. Fellows also found it challenging to get time from their jobs and family to travel to Nairobi for the training. The wide geographic dispersion of the fellows was also a challenge. At the beginning, some institutions especially those that trained FEs on GRE, TOEFL and G-Mat were not very good in training resulting in IFP changing training institutions more than twice. While it was mandatory to conduct the trainings for all the FEs at the same time and place in order to continue with Cohort building and maintain quality, it was not very easy to have all the FEs at a central place for a long period of time because these are mature people with other responsibilities at their work places, within the community and at family levels. As a result of this, it was common to find some fellows sneaking back to their stations on the week-ends to attend to urgent matters resulting in missing some Friday or Monday morning classes. On few occasions, fellows were recalled back to work before completing the training. In such cases, the training institution was requested to provide materials for revision and also negotiated for special remedial classes or consultation through the most efficient means. It is also true that FEs came from very wide geographic areas that posed challenges in terms of travelling time, communication and coordination. Meeting the objectives of all FEs was also a challenge because they all had different expectations. Meeting the training needs of all FEs was not very easy because they were at different levels of exposure, knowledge and trainings in different areas. Some FEs felt they were ahead of others in certain areas and that they wasted time going through lessons they had undergone in other forums. Others felt shy that they did not know some issues regarded as simple. This was addressed by encouraging FEs to support each other in the areas where they had strength and to consider themselves as a team who would succeed together.

PAT gave the FEs the skills they needed to enable them effectively participate and succeed in their academic programs. The IT skills enabled them to attend to class responsibilities i.e. downloading reading materials, handling assignments, registering for courses, writing reports and giving presentations. This gave them a boost in their academic work by enabling them to settle down as first as they arrived at their institutions of higher learning as opposed to spending time learning these necessary skills. Research skills gave the Fellows a boost during their research activities and reporting. They had knowledge and skills that enabled them to carry out worthwhile researches, analyze their data and write their research reports. One very positive aspect in the design of PAT was the free hand the IPs had to organize PAT to meet the needs of their Cohorts. Not all IPs organized similar PATs in terms of content due to the different scenarios in each country. Some countries took longer e.g. on Language training depending on their county‟s official language or language of instruction. Generally the PAT met the needs of the fellows because it covered the relevant areas identified during Needs Assessment as crucial to the task ahead that of enabling them to settle fast in their new environments and to succeed academically. Feedback received from fellows proved the fact that the PAT offered especially on computer training was a key success factor during their fellowship period since all engagements during their graduate studies was through the computer. They were able to register

“My interaction with college mates who are on scholarships courtesy of other scholarship programs reveals how IFP is by far the best. Its support to fellows as part of preparation, placement, departure and settling in is incomparable. It is also rigorous and transparent. I would have found it unbearable if IFP didn‟t accord its fellows the assistance. The support is definitive with its responsiveness through an elaborate and functional system that ensures a fellow‟s academic program is not interrupted for any reason” a member of the 9th Cohort at Duke University had this to say

for classes as soon as they arrived at their institutions, were able to communicate with their supervisors and receive all communications necessary for their settling down. This was also the case with the language tests which is evidently a challenge for other students who wish to go and study in the US but not through IFP. Many people struggle to get the funds to register for the exams and to attend training. It was a great relief to the IFP fellows to receive this support from the program. However, it would have been more effective to conduct the computer training just before the fellows departed for host countries to enable them start practicing the knowledge they had acquired before they forgot what they had been taught. Most of the fellows had not handled computers before becoming IFP beneficiaries and were therefore bound to face some challenges in using their new laptops which came a couple of months after the computer training. Some of them had the comments below;

All the In-country PAT trainings were conducted on a group basis. This was strategic because of the opportunity these trainings afforded the FEs to know and learn about each other. The FEs used these opportunities to discover more about their fellow beneficiaries and out of these grew individual and national support systems that later grew to regional and global levels. It was also during PAT that FEs discovered their common interest which led to some of them choosing to study in similar institutions thereby strengthening cohorts at study institutional level. PAT also provided a foundation for each cohort that continued until the alumni stage. Most fellows registered their email contacts for the first time during these trainings. This enabled fellows to stay in touch with each other and formed the foundation of their future communication channels. The support system that the FEs initiated and carried with them to their new environments was very important because it provided them with avenues for consultations whenever faced by any issues or challenges. The Orientation on different issues both academic and social was very important as the FEs left home. They were well prepared to depart from home and family and to deal with the new environments that could have presented them with culture shock upon arrival at their host institutions. The comprehensive information about the programs expectations helped to keep the FEs on the right track throughout their study period. The leadership sessions were very important as they reminded the FEs of the vows they had taken; to go and better their skills and knowledge to come out as better leaders of their communities and the world. The group dynamics kept them focused as a team with a common goal, that of promoting Social Justice, a service they carried with them everywhere. These have clearly been expressed in the fellow‟s profiles that have been published.

In Kenya, a total of 32.5% Kenyan fellows received host country PAT program at their host

“The welcome and support from IFP fellows made my adjustment to the new environment relatively easy though I experienced culture and environmental shocks but at a mild extent. The thorough preparations we were given all through our preparations by IFP including the experience sharing from alumni also played an important role in assisting my settling down in the new country” IFP 8th Cohort member, Flinders University.

institutions. The bulk of these students studied in the UK. The host Country PAT served special purposes i.e. offering language training and other programs that provided the foundation for the main academic courses. It enabled Fellows to acclimatize with their new environments that presented a different culture, academic expectations and way of life in general. Some of the subject areas included; Intensive English language training, English language training for non English speakers and Cultural orientation amongst others. The host country PAT enabled fellows to easily transit to the main courses. It also provided fellows with some skills i.e. Academic English Language writing that was important for their academic performance. Although there is

35 no evidence that fellows who attended the host country PAT performed better than those who did not, its value in enabling the fellows, some who had spent many years out of class to get back into academic mode is worth lauding.

Different host institutions designed PAT trainings for specific reasons. Most institutions aimed at providing particular skills to the fellows to enable them succeed academically. Some of the PATs were dependent upon the courses that fellows were enrolled to study hence an introduction to the main course, e.g. study of sign language as a prelude to special education courses. Others were structured alongside the factors prevailing in fellow‟s countries of origin e.g. the language of instruction in schools, and yet others were as a result of the language test scores the fellows attained. It is worth noting that PAT at host institutions increased the pace of fellow‟s settlement in their new environments. It provided an opportunity for fellows to familiarize themselves with their new environments, make new acquaintances, master the new accent, get housing and acquaint themselves with the learning systems of their host institutions. The training served specific needs of specific fellows. Most institutions spelt out their admission requirements that fellows had to meet. It is therefore not clearly evident that the host country PAT could have been more beneficial to the fellows who studied abroad.

The Fellows who benefitted from both PATs did this as a requirement from their host Universities. Some were due to special needs required in the courses Fellows planned to take. There are no major differences that have been observed between fellows who received PAT at in-country level alone and those who received it in both places. Some of the valuable aspects of the host-country PAT were its ability to enable fellows to acclimatize early before the actual academic programs started, this was an added advantage. This gave fellows more confidence to embark on their academic courses. The language training provided FEs with added skills necessary for their main academic programs.

Placement During the inaugural meeting of a cohort, which is Needs Assessment, Academic Advisors from different study regions were invited to come and address the FEs. They brought along detailed information about institutions of learning in the respective areas they represented including those institutions ratings on different courses. This literature was left with the FEs for the entire period of the activity to enable them read it over and over for purposes of making choices of institutions. The advisors gave talks and also answered questions from the FEs. Alumni were invited to share their experiences with different institutions that they had studied in. IFP staff shared information on Strategic University Partners and Cluster Universities. This information was provided to the FEs on written form as they went back home in order for them to continue with the exercise before returning the University application forms to the IP. Fellows were encouraged to visit websites of different potential institutions for further information.

IFP staff coordinated and managed the overall process of identifying potential placement opportunities. The staff contacted the academic advisors, the FEs and brought them together during the Needs Assessment. The staff also put together information on the SUPs and Cluster Universities for the FEs. The staff made clarity where necessary and provided details on the program policies to the FEs. The staff continued with the advice and consultations up to when the placement process was concluded. The FEs had the mandate to take the information provided at the Needs Assessment and use it to make informed choices on institutions that would meet their study objectives. It was the responsibility of the FEs to consult with the IFP staff, the academic advisors, the alumni and any other persons who could assist them in identifying potential placement opportunities. The academic advisors and subject experts provided all the necessary information on studying at different regions and institutions. They helped the FEs to finalize or sharpen their study objectives and making them practical topics for studying in relation to study courses. They also continued to consult with the FEs on choosing study regions, institutions and courses. Alumni also shared their experience that came in handy for the FEs as they chose potential placement opportunities. Apart from academic matters, the alumni shared about non academic life that aided academic success.

The placement process is a very important stage in the entire fellowship and had to be done with a lot of keenness and coordination ensuring all the involved people and intuitions consulted effectively, otherwise fellows could possibly miss programs that address their study objectives and end up in institutions where they would be “lost”. After the Needs Assessment activity where FEs received comprehensive information on responsibilities of different partners including themselves, policies on study regions, application process and information on academic institutions, they were given two months to synthesize the information. The FEs were also provided with the IFP University Application form on hard and soft copy after being taken through its details. FEs utilized the two months period to finalize their study objectives and make the choices on preferred study institutions. During this period they consulted with the IFP office, subject and academic experts, alumni and any other relevant people. Some of the FEs filled out their University Application forms and sent them to IFP office for review before making final applications that included all the other required documents. This process was necessary to minimize on any mistakes.

By the end of the Needs Assessment activity, FEs had already made a choice on their study regions. This was important to enable the IFP office to make arrangements for the relevant language tests for different FEs wishing to study in different regions. By the end of the two months period, the FEs were ready with their University Applications including all required documents e.g. referees letters, medical records and academic testimonials attached. These were delivered to the IP for transmission to IIE, for those going to North America and Canada, British Council, those going to the UK and NUFFIC for Continental Europe and the rest directly to the institutions in order to beat the application submission deadlines of different institutions the FEs

37 were applying to. Meanwhile fellows were enrolled for Language tests as required by the regions of study they had chosen. The placement partners took over the process from this point to deliver and follow up with the institutions on behalf of the FEs on the admission process. The placement partners, due to their experience and expertise could sometimes request the FEs to reconsider their choice of institutions depending on their evaluation of the FEs Study Objectives in relation to the choice of institutions. The placement partners communicated any relevant information to the FEs through the International Partners e.g. to seek clarifications or additional information and any other necessary requirements. Once FEs started receiving offers from Universities, they had the final say on accepting or rejecting these offers. This was communicated through the International partner until a final decision was arrived at by the FE who confirmed their acceptance in writing. Finally the Placement partner confirmed the acceptance to the FEs choice institution.

For fellows who wished to study in-region, the same procedure was followed for selecting the study regions and institutions. This was because at the stage of selecting institutions, all the FEs selected three institutions in one region abroad and one institution in-region or in-country. For in-region options, in the Kenyan case where one FE chose to study in the region, African American Institute in South Africa acted as the placement partner. The difference between the fellow who studied locally and the rest who went abroad was the start of the academic year. Those who went abroad started in the fall of the same year while the fellow who studied in the region, in South Africa started his program the following January. For the FE who studied in- country, Kenya, the placement process was similar apart from the fact that the local office took the position of the placement partner to deal with the Universities directly on placement matters. In all these, the FE made the final decision.

In Kenya we mainly worked with two placement partners, thus the British Council for Fellows who chose to study in the UK and Institute of International Education (IIE) for Fellows who chose North America and Canada. For the rest of Europe, we dealt with Nuffic and AAI for South Africa. As the local office, our main role was to provide the link between the Placement Partner and the FE, academic institution and the program management (IFP New York) at each stage of the Fellowship process. At the placement stage, the International Partner prepared the application materials ensuring all the requirements were met for different regions and institutions and forwarded these to the placement partner for submission to the Universities. The International partner communicated any FE special needs or requirements to the placement partners who followed up with the FEs. The IP also ensured that the FEs made informed choices on study institutions in writing and communicating this information to the placement partner. The IP communicated with the PP on all visa preparations and on any host institutions PAT requirements. At this stage, communication also covered tuition payment procedures and all documentation concerning FEs stay at the host institution. After the FE reported for the start of their academic programs, communication continued regarding approvals on any arising issues

38 i.e. program adjustments, special requirements for any fellows but more so on fellows with special needs.

To support FEs in making the regional institutions choices, staff ensured that all FEs made one regional or local placement option at the time of choosing regions and institutions. The academic and subject advisors covered all regions of study during their presentations. The IP also brought information about the regional institutions and their strengths in different faculties to share during Needs Assessment activity. For Regional options, colleagues at African American Institute in South Africa, the most preferred regional destination for Kenyans, provided the details on application submission deadlines and requirements. This was important in order to monitor when the regional applications should be activated. South Africa was specific because all Kenyan fellows only considered Universities in South Africa for their regional options. As the placements in the other regions were on going, the IP monitored the trend and signaled AAI or activated the local application depending on the feedback from the PP. At this stage, the IP requested the FE to fill out the relevant institutions application forms and other application requirements to meet the deadline. The main challenge was in knowing when to activate the regional or local applications. This was because most FEs preferred to study abroad and only took the local option after missing admissions abroad. This information came late in the day because the PP continued trying all the available options to have FEs admitted to institutions of their preferred regions before turning to local options. The IP had to work under pressure sometimes requesting for more time to put all the documentations together to meet the application deadlines at the in-region or in-country institutions.

All fellows got carried away by the fact that they could study anywhere in the world and this notion had to be well managed in order to make meaningful sense. The policy of best fit institutions helped the IP to explain to the FEs the benefit of using this method to select their possible academic institutions. The detailed information provided by the academic and subject experts that showed the ratings of institutions on different courses enabled the FEs to realize that some institutions were world top class institutions but were not rated highly on their particular academic areas. By sharing with the FEs additional benefits of attending some other institutions in addition to academic benefits, it opened the FEs minds to think more objectively. Such institutions were Cluster and SUPS. Issues like institutional support on non academic areas, benefits for 4th year PhD tuition support, peer support, leadership training benefits all endeared FEs to particular institutions. Providing data on where IFP fellows had studied and the positive aspects of the same also helped to convince the FEs to look at other options other than what they had in mind. This was evidence with fellows who studied in Brandeis University who got “special” treatment from the institution, found the course on Sustainable International Development very relevant to their countries situations and had the peer support from other IFP fellows from their own country and other countries.

Some challenges for Fellows during placement included weak knowledge of post-graduate programs in their fields, Language test scores, unrealistic expectations, PhD placements, Fellows with disabilities and weather challenges especially those from hot geographical areas and those with special health conditions. Not only was weak knowledge of academic programs a challenge to FEs, but also institutions that could meet their study objectives effectively. This sometimes made FEs to have very high expectations in terms of focusing on only renowned world class institutions like MIT, Harvard, etc or institutions that people familiar to them had knowledge about but may not necessarily be relevant to their study areas. Placement of Fellows with special needs was not so much of a challenge but required communicating the disability information at the right time to the right office. Some FEs also overrated themselves and felt that they only deserved the “best” as well as FEs who were overwhelmed and could not make up their minds because they felt the world had just opened up for them through this opportunity. All these were addressed by providing more information on the institutions‟ strength or specialties, information on the best fit institutions, Cluster and SUPS, data on IFP fellows who had attended different institutions and their areas of study. Additional benefits available to students from some institutions also helped to convince the FEs. For PhDs, it was necessary to confirm in advance professors who were interested in working with the individual FEs on their research topics. All this information was provided very early in the program to nip such challenges in the bud at the appropriate time.

However, placement to Australia posed some challenges due to very elaborate, expensive and slow moving visa process. Corresponding with academic institutions was problematic due to slow or no responses from the institutions. This was due to the fact that there was no Placement Partner for this study region. In liaison with the Australian Education Centre, we made the FEs aware of this fact so that they would be prepared for what awaited them. We also tried to involve the Australian Embassy in Kenya, especially the education office to assist with some of the processes. Later when the UK changed their visa regulations, there were challenges on the requirements for visa applications and some FEs were denied visas on one or two occasions before finally being granted. This was due to lack of clear communication from the PP on the new visa requirements. However, the matter was addressed amicably. This hiccup led to unprecedented expenditure of funds to facilitate extra visa application charges. Some FEs received short duration visas to start PAT and applied for the main study period visa while already at the host institution.

One area that posed a challenge during placement was in Gender Studies. This was because different regions and institutions study the Gender course from different perspectives. Some students from Africa going to study in the developed world found the course content quite different from their expectations. Some FEs felt that most of the courses addressed more of feminism issues than Gender aspects. These were expressed by fellows who studied the course at Rutgers and San Francisco State Universities. Placement of students wishing to study Special

Education also faced some challenges. Some fellows were surprised that they had to study their courses online and missed the class environment exposure. This was the case with University of Texas at Austin, Hawaii and Arkansas. However, this was addressed by the institutions and the fellows became satisfied after efforts were made to beef up the online courses with some class environment. One area fellows faced difficulties in gaining admission were Psychology and Counseling. It later emerged that the main reason for this was because these courses were highly demanding and included practicum sessions in the USA which were not easy to get.

The Kenyan fellows had very high value on international placements due to the fact that they viewed international institutions as more superior than the local or in-region institutions. The superiority was on the wide variety of courses available at these institutions for students to choose from, well stocked libraries, and well developed faculty members in quality and in numbers plus ability of students to finish their programs on schedule. They also valued the opportunity to learn new ideas in new environments. They felt that it was also an opportunity to interact with scholars from all over the world and an opportunity to have a world view of issues.

In Kenya, the only fellow to study in-country took this decision willingly because he did not want to get away from his community responsibilities. He wanted to continue staying close to his community and serving them in the various areas he was responsible for. For those who studied abroad, they were influenced by factors like ability to complete their degree studies on time as planned. This was important for planning purposes e.g. those who took leave from their places of work. Fellows also wanted to benefit from the more sophisticated resources of the world class Universities. They looked forward to having an opportunity to meet with people from other parts of the world in order to exchange their ideas and learn new things.

As varied as the background of the fellows, so were their expectations. Strategies to manage their expectations effectively was put in place although there were some pockets of FEs whose expectations remained high even after going through sessions with IFP staff and other advisors. Managing Fellows expectations requires an early start and honest intervention. Firmness and equal treatment to everyone was an effective way to help manage the situation. The issue of leadership came in handy. The office stressed to the FEs that they were leaders in Making and had to lead by example. This included respecting authority, integrity, conducting oneself with decorum, in a more respectful and civilized manner, listening and consulting and taking other people into consideration. Because some fellows had interacted with some earlier beneficiaries, they had some knowledge about the scholarship‟s details and shared this with the other FEs especially about the scholarship package. Statements like “fellows can study anywhere in the world” or “monthly stipend is USD 2,000 per month” not knowing this depended upon ones location, created a lot of excitement among the fellows and gave them wild ideas. This was made worse by the fact that most of the fellows were from marginalized backgrounds and had

“It‟s amazing! It‟s remarkable to see how well a program can be timely designed, implemented, monitored and evaluated. Now, I have a model to replicate in terms of effective program planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. I no longer need to sit in a class for project management; I have seen it all in Ford Foundation IFP program. I am rating IFP coverage as timely and very effective because I learnt about IFP scholarships through an advert in the local daily newspaper in Kenya which was brought to me by a neighbor. The selection criterion is incredible, fair and a true reflection of social justice at work. The university placement is excellent. It takes into consideration an individual‟s interests in terms of program of study and region of study. The monitoring systems are highly efficient and any program developer would like to replicate IFP monitoring systems. What about the stipend? It‟s cool, no financial stress. When you call water, it comes; when you call food, it‟s there”.

little information and exposure on various issues. It took a lot of humility, patience and tact to bring them to appreciate our advice.

During the placement process, limiting fellows to only four applications enabled FEs to be more focused on their areas or specialties and hence narrowed their search to specific schools rather than throwing in any names without much thought. Again, because of the program‟s target group, this system of focusing the fellows minds towards a specific region and narrowing their choices to four institutions helped a lot in coming up with relevant institutions for the fellows. Otherwise due to most FEs limited knowledge on studying abroad, the process could become unmanageable without proper guidance. It also gave the placement partners an easier time to focus on placement process which would otherwise be too wide and challenging to handle. A single international region made it easy to focus on a particular placement partner, meet the application requirements including deadlines and Language test scores which varied from region to region. It also enabled FEs to focus on specific courses known to be the strength of some regions.

The program‟s decision to work with Placement Partners was very effective. They were very knowledgeable on graduate study details in their respective regions. Effective communication and mutual consultation was put in place which enabled a smooth working environment. The PPs were very cooperative and there were no major challenges. However, issues of delays in receiving response on the University applications sometimes arose. As the IP, at times we found ourselves in awkward positions being the go betweens for the PP and the FE. The FE could not understand why the IP as the primary contact could not contact the University directly to receive feedback on applications especially where this was taking longer. However, as IPs, we understood that the delays were as a result of the big numbers PPs were dealing with and also having to contend with the policies of a variety of host institutions. Issues of arrival at the host institutions, being met at the airport and accommodation was not clear in all the institutions. While the PPs tried as much as possible to address these, some FEs still spent their first nights in expensive hotels that almost finished their whole month‟s stipend. This was also the case with some Universities where FEs failed to receive clear information on how to arrive. For local

Universities, the issue lay in the commencement of the academic programs and the period of application deadline. Most FEs did hang on to the International applications until sometimes it became too late to activate local choices. This meant that IPs had to work under pressure to get admissions for these FEs using their local contacts. Because of last minute processes, FEs sometimes had to contend with available courses not very endearing to them. This was the case of some Uganda fellows who studied in Kenya.

The focus on Cluster and SUPS guided the overall activity of study institutions selection. IFP staff started off by talking about these institutions and the benefits they provided, both academic and non academic. We encouraged FEs to start by finding courses that met their study objectives within the cluster and SUPS Universities before venturing outside. The benefits of such institutions were communicated to the FEs in order for them to consider the value of choosing the same. The fact that these Universities already had a big number of other IFP fellows provided an opportunity for the FEs to get support on arrival and later. For PhD fellows, such Universities had the potential of offering support for the fourth year study period. Some of these institutions like Brandeis had a good elaborate plan to help FEs to settle down by taking them on house hunting sprees and other benefits like Summer Enrichment programs and leadership forums.

If there was an opportunity to repeat the IFP Program, it would be more efficient to work with a limited number of universities rather than a wider choice. The current model of categorizing Universities into SUPS or Clusters would still be a good idea probably only requiring revision due to the changing world trends, areas of focus, target group, different needs etc. Focusing on specific number of institutions is beneficial because it helps to cut down on the processes and procedures required by different institutions. This system would also cut down on the delays experienced during placements and ensure an efficient system of monitoring. However, the challenge may arise from ensuring that all the fellows‟ academic objectives can be met with this small group of Universities. Unless the program changes to focus on specific professional areas thus only considering certain academic fields, it may pose some challenges that would require addressing. Cutting out some institutions can also be counterproductive and lead to missing out on the benefits that fellows and the overall program can draw from some of these institutions. The wide and varied flow of ideas and exchange of the same from different institutions add to the enrichment of the IFP program. A very careful but wide and open consideration would help in coming up with a comprehensive category of institutions to work with that would effectively address the objectives of the program.

In general, fellows were satisfied with the information they received from the universities between the time they had accepted the admission offers and when they arrived at the university on academic matters and areas such as housing and immigration policies. The few isolated cases of incidents cannot overshadow the overall success achieved. In the event that there were some

43 hitches, the FEs took advantage of the support provided by the IP or contacted their academic advisors or student advisors whose contacts were provided. Most institutions were thorough in providing information and even directed fellows to websites for further information. Some FEs did not follow the instructions and ended up facing problems upon arrival at their host institutions i.e. having to spend the first nights in expensive accommodations due to lack of confirming any accommodation in advance with the host institutions. On academic matters, the information provided was adequate and with the contacts of the Academic advisor also provided, FEs who followed the instructions did not have any difficulties settling down to their new environments both academically and on non academic matters. At the end of it all, Kenyan fellows studied and gained skills and experiences in a wide range of professions with the greatest share going towards Education and Development. We are happy with this because it is representative of some of the areas Kenya as a country still lags behind and requires more focus in.

Figure 5: Areas of Study

Pre-Departure Orientation

Figure 6: IFP East Africa Pre-Departure Meeting for the 9th Cohort - Nairobi, June 2011.

Pre-departure meetings were organized on a regional basis for all the cohorts from East Africa region just before Fellows departed for their studies. A number of these meetings were held in Nairobi for different cohorts from the three East African countries, Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania. The meetings brought the regional Fellows as well as the IPs from the region together. The meetings provided a good forum for Fellows from each country to continue cementing their Cohort building but more so to start cohort building with their East Africa cohorts. As in the country cohort activities, fellows took these opportunities to know each other better, sharing their experiences and providing support for each other on different issues. They encouraged each other too. The Pre Departure orientation occurred at a time when most Fellows had received their admissions for studies. It therefore provided a good forum for Fellows to initiate their future host University cohorts as they met others who were admitted to similar schools as themselves.

The meetings were organized by all the three IPs from the regional. The hosting partner took the responsibility to budget for and coordinate the activity in consultation with the other IPs on the cost of flights and also any in-country expenses. Each IP presented the information for their

45 country requirements for travel and accommodation purposes. The hosting partner took the lead in setting the agenda for the meeting with the other partners providing their inputs on the same and others e.g. selecting the speakers and in the meeting‟s facilitation. The hosting partner sent out the invitations to all the fellows and provided any information regarding logistics. The meetings lasted between four and five days. During this period, fellows had enough time to interact with each other, with invited alumni, learn from the guest speakers and above all, understand the overall policies governing the scholarship. Pre Departure meetings were less timid as fellows were already familiar with IFP staff, some advisors, with their in-country cohort members and the program expectations. It was not marked with curiosity like the first meeting – Needs assessment.

Some of the topics discussed during these meetings included; - Overview of IFP, its Achievements and Legacy; Contribution of Higher Education to Leadership Development in Africa; The role of Higher Education in Social Justice Promotion; Overcoming Marginalization (Studying abroad and Re-Entry back home); Cohort Building and Group Dynamics; Legacy Building and Networking; Pre-Departure Orientation and Fellows‟ Handbook Review including; a) Fellow‟s Contract Review b) Financial Support and Budget Management c) Health and Accident Insurance d) Fellow‟s Academic Reporting Responsibilities e) Other Policies and Procedures f) Pre-departure Preparation and Logistics g) Communications Protocols

Each year, a number of external speakers were invited to handle different topics as decided by the regional organizers. Most of the speakers addressed issues regarded as of importance to the whole region but also topical in nature. These included but not limited to; Integration of the East Africa region, Environmental issues, Trade across the region amongst many. Expert speakers with experience in international education, pre-departure orientation were also invited to address the Fellows. Some of these experts were from the American Embassy and had worked with the Fulbright beneficiaries.

Over time, the orientation meetings changed to incorporate more topics as we received feedback from fellows. Some notably introduced or expanded topics included Leadership, Group dynamics and team building. The duration of the meetings also changed over time to fewer days but with well planned and managed activities. Different topics were introduced each year to reflect on the contemporary issues of the time. This was to allow FEs to get engaged with the region‟s current issues. The period of holding the event was shifted back in the year to allow for all the Fellows to attend the activity including those whose programs were scheduled to start

46 early or those attending Host Universities Pre-Academic trainings. Leadership and Cohort building was discussed at length during the pre-departure meetings. Fellows were given opportunities and assignments to discuss these topics as part of their group work and reported back to plenary where more discussions were held. Plays with leadership themes were staged to further reinforce different concepts of leadership. Alumni were invited to share their experiences during studies and to talk about activities they had been involved in upon coming back and the impact they had made on their leadership roles and promotion of Social Justice. This was necessary to enable the fellows go to study with the return in mind. The alumni provided further advising on academic issues especially on the level of academic participation and involvement expected of the students at graduate studies, grading system and tips on achieving success as a student. Because Pre-Departure orientation was held when most fellows had been admitted to Universities, the level of academic advising at this point was focused towards achieving success in the chosen regions, schools and faculties as opposed to choosing best fit institutions and programs.

Cohort Building especially at a regional level was very important. Fellows having received their admissions, also started knowing those who would be attending similar schools with them and hence the start of their cohort at the host institution level. Some fellows also had a chance to travel for the first time outside their country and by air. These activities were a form of rehearsal to some fellows before they finally left for their studies. The forums were used to re-enforce program policies to the fellows. These forums acted to mark the end of Fellow Elect stage to full fellowship stage. Fellows came out of the meetings ready to depart. Appreciations, satisfaction, confidence acquisition, were the feedback received from fellows. The one year long preparation period had changed the fellows who start to see more of their leadership skills and were ready to venture into the new world. The orientation and the one year period was also very important because it gave the FEs tips and time to reorganize themselves at the family and job fronts. Because the beneficiaries are mature people with family and work responsibilities that they could not just abandon, the one year accorded them was enough time to put their houses in order and got encouragement from each other in their similar situations. Fellows from some cultures like the Muslim or the Pastoralist communities are shy to talk about themselves lest they are considered to be bragging. But after going through PAT, they started to loosen up. Generally, fellows also felt more empowered due to the new things they had learnt. However, those who had not gained admission by the time of Pre-Departure orientation felt worreid of their future and became anxious seeing that their colleagues had received admissions. After fellows joined their Universities and met with other students who did not benefit from the kind of preparation they received through Pre-Departure orientation, they expressed their appreciation for the orientation and said that they were able to settle down much faster due to the orientation they were given. They did not spend much time to find out what they needed to do because they were well prepared and armed with all the necessary information. They settled down to their academic lives much faster and successfully than other international students. Because they had

47 the placement partners to guide them on all the requirements of moving to and living in a foreign country, they spent less time acquiring the right status. The fellows did not have to work and so spent more time on their studies thereby becoming more successful.

If there was a chance to re-design these meetings, I would let the meetings run as they are designed today because they effectively addressed all the aspects of the fellowship at each stage. There is no glaring shortfall that could necessitate any restructuring of the Pre Departure activity. However, the topics of discussions could change to capture the contemporary issues and other topics important to the audience. The Pre-departure orientation was important to the fellows who studied in-country or region as well. They had a chance to meet other members of their cohorts which was important for their future up to the alumni stage because they had a group to identify with before familiarizing with the larger group which sometimes never gets a chance to meet face to face. The topics of discussion were also relevant to them especially when they were ready to attend their sandwich programs abroad. The Leadership, Legacy Building, Group dynamics and team work topics discussed were key to all the FEs whether studying in-region, in- country or abroad as the basis of the scholarship was to strengthen Leadership capacity. The topics covered under the Fellows Handbook were all important to the in-country or region fellows because the policies applied to everyone. They got an opportunity to interact with their colleagues and were able to cement their relationships with their cohort members which created a sense of belonging for them. They shared their ideas and learnt from others too.

The Study/Monitoring Period

Figure 7: Host Countries

Per the figure above, most of the Kenyan fellows studied abroad. The biggest number studied in the USA, followed by the UK, the Netherlands and the UK. Only one fellow studied in South Africa and one in Kenya. Studying abroad did not come without some challenges to the Fellows. One of the challenges fellows faced was settling down in their new environments. Right at the beginning, some did not know what to do with the welcome packages despite the clear instructions. Even after arrival at their host institutions, some fellows took a while to process the documents they needed in order to acquire the right status in their host countries. This hampered other process e.g. in the US where the fellows delayed in opening their bank accounts and receiving their stipend. The challenges ranged from academic to personal matters. Academically a few fellows were not satisfied with their academic programs and wished to change. A few also wanted to enroll into dual programs or take on other courses outside their endorsed areas in order to benefit from the opportunity to learn more. Towards the end of the grant period, some fellows requested for extensions to continue staying abroad to complete their programs or to engage in other matters. This was against the IFP policy. Others wanted to engage in work or internships or volunteer work outside their Universities in order to earn some money or to gain experience. Health issues were another area that posed a great challenge. Fellows were not very conversant with the Medical cover provided. Sometime it was confusing for them on whether to make use of the IFP sponsored health insurance or the one provided by the University. They also did not clearly understand the conditions that were covered as opposed to those excluded. They did not quite understand where to send receipts for claims on costs they incurred on medical services. Renewing the insurance cards was a challenge to many of them. The procedures for requesting different funds available to the FEs were a challenge sometimes as well as where and when to send different reports. This took a lot of liaising with the IP and Placement partners to provide support to the Fellows.

On monitoring, the IPs main responsibility was to coordinate the different roles played by different partners and Fellows to enable the fellowship program to meet its objectives. We provided all the support the Fellows required in order to have a smooth academic and social life during their study period. This was through ensuring that Fellows requests and demands were met in a timely manner to avoid interruption of their programs. We communicated to the Fellows any issues that required their attention from the Program secretariat or Grant managers and vice versa. IPs also communicated as necessary with the Fellows advisors on academic matters. We reminded the Fellows of their responsibilities and when these were required. We provided support in any areas that were not clearly understood and where we were not sure, we consulted with the secretariat. IPs approved all the fellows‟ requests and liaised with the grant administrators for processing of the same. We ensured fellows sent their transcripts and academic term reports before renewal of their grants. Our contacts with fellows were on a daily basis on a variety of issues. Most of the time, communication with the Fellows was on individual basis, a particular group e.g. a Cohort, those studying in a particular region or all the fellows depending on the subject matter. Most contact was through the email. Where necessary,

49 we made a call to the fellow but this was rare. However, fellows called us quite often if they had an urgent matter to consult on e.g. abrupt travel back home due to death of a family member. As an office, we were always proactive in the monitoring process and never waited for anything to fall through the cracks before reminding the fellow or the concerned partner. This helped to keep the fellows alert on their responsibilities.

To ensure that Fellows stayed in contact with the program, and provided required reports and updates we maintained a free communication flow with the fellows throughout their study period. Periodically, we also reminded the fellows of their responsibilities. Fellows were also reminded about pending responsibilities where necessary. Approvals and processing of documents were withheld to compel some few fellows who were lagging behind to meet their responsibilities. We did not maintain regular contact with Fellows academic advisors unless there was need to do so. However, most of the contacts were for positive reasons on follow ups or procedures e.g. fellows wanting to adjust their study plans in order to finish their courses faster, or those applying to work in their academic departments or for summer programs. Other than one fellow who finally withdrew from the program, our contacts with academic advisors were positive.

Most of our fellows were very satisfied with their academic expectations. A few had challenges at the beginning especially at Arkansas and Hawaii in Manoa who felt that they were missing the classroom interaction because their programs were being run online. However, with minimal adjustments, they settled down and appreciated the programs. The fellow at Arkansas received a received a PhD scholarship at the same institution after completing her Masters and the one in Hawaii one is being considered for the same too. Most fellows were very happy to get an opportunity and forum to exchange their ideas with other students from other parts of the world. The practical experiences they received, the class participation that added to their levels of confidence and the overall knowledge, skills and exposure plus leadership capacity building that came with all these outweighed the sacrifice to be away from home. Although only one Kenyan studied in country and one in region, there exists no much difference between the two groups. Those who studied in region and in country had a chance to go abroad for Sandwich studies and hence had an opportunity to benefit from the “International Education” their colleagues got. They had a chance to interact with people from different parts of the world just like their counterparts who studied abroad.

Fellows had good experiences wherever they studied. Some of the characteristics of the pleasant experiences that stood out were support from the international students‟ offices that saw fellows get adequate support to settle down. Support from the academic advisors was also a great characteristic of institutions especially with PhD programs where Fellows required a lot of support beyond the third year IFP grant period. Fellows had a lot of praises for their advisors whom they felt were committed, were professional and very supportive. Some alumni have

remained in contact with their academic advisors to date long after completing their studies.

Opportunities for fellows to have hands on practical work in their areas of study through internships and employment provided a lot of positive value to the students although such opportunities were limited. The ability of some institutions to offer fellows additional opportunities for leadership development and cohort building provided fellows with invaluable additional benefits during their studies. However, a few cases of misunderstanding or miscommunication between a fellow and their supervisors turned out negatively for some fellows at some institutions. Such cases created challenges for the fellows and the program in overall e.g. lack of proper advising resulting in lack of enrolment for some mandatory classes offered only during particular time of the academic year. Fellows were then forced to seek extensions in order to catch up with such classes. Some fellows faced very difficult situations with such cases. Some fellows also felt that their Universities did not support them in getting internships which were part of their courses and they faced challenges completing their courses at the right time. Lack of institutional support to fellows during fourth year PhD studies created a strain for fellows in such institutions.

“One thing I must point out was the way the teachers are so considerate and understanding to students, especially the international students. They are alive to the fact that cultural shocks and other social factors can hinder ones progress, so they are always ready to listen to you and accommodate your deficiencies” says an alumni who studied PhD in the US.

Fellows who attended programs/universities with significant numbers of other IFP Fellows had some noticeably different study experience. These fellows had the benefit of having people they were familiar with around them whom they could share a lot of issues with. This gave them support system which reduced the intensity of challenges. They learnt from each other and supported one another on issues of mutual interest including meeting all their obligations as required by the program policies.

However, as earlier mentioned, some fellows in some fields had challenges in certain regions where the course content did not meet the students‟ expectation because they felt that it did not address the challenges in the African context. Such courses were i.e. Gender studies. Students of Public Health in the North American region were very happy with their experience and this is notably due to the fact that the best schools in Public Health are based in this region. This was also the case with the students who studied International Development at SID in Brandeis University who found the course very relevant to their Africa region issues and also at Sussex University. There is no major notable difference between fellows who attended one year and two years Masters Programs. However, fellows who attended two year programs had a lot of time to integrate with their new environments and to learn more things including socializing

51 which those who attended one year programs missed. It is also a fact that those who spent two years had time to dig deeper into their studies by virtue of the duration. This means that those who stayed away longer had transformed in more ways than those who were out for shorter periods. The longer one stayed away, the more time it took them to settle back after completion of their degree programs.

Most fellows were very satisfied with the support they received from their academic advisors‟ some of whom went beyond their mandates and supported the students with their personal problems i.e. housing information. They also felt that their academic advisors were instrumental in ensuring they made the right decisions at the right time to enable them complete their studies successfully on time. Fellows also received adequate support from other institutional offices like the international office especially on their personal problems including settling down in their new environments, time off during sickness and death of family members amongst others. However, this depended on the cooperation from the Fellows themselves to act responsibly and know what to do at the right time. Those with special needs were able to receive required cooperation from their academic or student advisors to meet their needs.

For most fellows, the university facilities or resources most important in providing support and assistance to them were the University Libraries including online libraries. They were able to find most of the resources they needed and even benefit from materials organized for them from other University libraries as need arose. PhD fellows benefitted from financial resources of some Universities by being engaged as Teaching Assistants (TAs) and receiving fees waivers in their fourth year of studies. Fellows with special needs benefitted from the special facilities within the Universities which made their stay in these institutions comfortable. These are special facilities e.g. software programs and brail printed materials for visually challenged fellows.

In Kenya, very few fellows took their families with them to their host institutions. The few who did were all PhD students apart from one Masters student who received support from her church to take her husband and two children with her to the USA for her Master of Public Health (MPh). The total number was 6 (six) and split halfway gender wise. All of them were successful in their studies. To date, only one has not come back home to Kenya after completion of his studies.

The common challenge the fellows faced in adjusting to academic life abroad was the academic workload which was heavy for some fellows. They felt that the amount of reading materials and required level of work and performance was much higher than what they were used to in their home Universities. They also found the issue of Plagiarism a fact that they had to contend with more seriously. Some fellows cited lack of adequate ICT skills as a challenge to their academic participation given that they were used to the Kenyan system where academic work is still being conducted manually unlike in the developed world where ICT has taken over. Some faced challenges adjusting to the accents of their fellow students and their lectures. On cross cultural

52 issues, some fellows got culture shocks in-terms of the informal way in which classes were conducted. Some were amazed by the social orientations of some people and how these were displayed openly. Some fellows were also hit by the “aloofness” or “unfriendliness” of most people. However after settling down, fellows found their host institutions very comfortable. Some of the earlier issues depicted negatively by the fellows later became positive attributes after a clear understanding of their new environments. The informal way of relating to the faculty staff without having to refer to their titles made the students easy and confident in dealing with their supervisors, an issue which initially was viewed as strange by the students. On degree completion, PhD fellows faced a challenge with their fourth year funding. Some were not lucky to find institutions that could waive their tuition fees or engage them at TA positions. Fellows who were required to take up internships also faced a challenge because these were not easy to secure in the study countries and yet internships were a condition for the award of their degrees. A small number of fellows failed to register for the right courses at the right time either as a result of poor advice of academic advisors or refusal to be guided. Sometime, such courses would only be offered at long intervals that sometime fell after the fellows grants had ended.

Figure 8: Degree Completion Rate

The special benefits and activities provided by IFP to the fellows made the whole difference between IFP and other scholarship programs. Fellows were able to strengthen their leadership skills through programs like LSJ, a feature that many programs and beneficiaries lack. These programs also enabled fellows to venture into areas that they would otherwise miss out on. The Arkansas program for example provided fellows with skills that enabled them to be admitted to and succeed in programs that they would probably not qualify for. The different funds available to the fellows provided them with support and peace of mind, e.g. financial support to their

53 families thereby leaving the fellows enough time to concentrate on their studies. The funds enhanced their networking opportunities through attendance of workshops and other relevant professional forums. Fellows also managed to come back home to carry out their research and visit their families something they would not afford without the special fund like Professional Enhancement Fund (PEF). This was a big plus to the fellows because it enabled them to obtain data that was relevant to their areas of study and future work. The visits back home provided an opportunity for the fellows to keep in touch with the home network that provided a smooth landing pad on repatriation. Staying away for too long could lead to loss of ties and reality resulting in culture shock upon coming back. The Computer allowance was a big support to the fellows because many of them did not own any computers before getting the IFP scholarships which could have made it very difficult for them to meet their academic requirements conducted fully through the use of computers. This fund was enough to purchase computers and small printers and even cameras that supported their research work. Disability fund filled a big gap in the lives of the fellows living with disability enabling them to become efficient hence competitive. For Fellows with visual disability, this fund facilitated the purchase of special computer programs i.e. Jaws that enabled them to access all the materials they required for their studies. It also enabled them to conduct their research with ease, communicate with fellows and provide the required reports on time without seeking any assistance. The fund was also used to purchase special mobility canes that made the fellows movement easy as was the motorized wheel chair for the physically challenged fellows. Most fellows with physical disability came to IFP with walking aids like calipers that were not providing them with enough support for mobility. This fund was therefore a big relief to the fellows because even after coming back home, they continued to use these equipment that have made their lives a little easier. The insurance funds were also generous because apart from covering the cost of healthcare for the fellows, it also assisted the fellows during difficult moments like on the loss of a family member or for family to visit the fellow in case of any health problem. All these, is part of what made IFP‟s success rate almost 100% because there existed a strong support system which accorded the FEs time to concentrate on their academic studies.

It is unfortunate that one fellow from Kenya did not complete his academic studies despite the program‟s support and being given a second chance at the University of Nairobi after dropping from Columbia University. With hind sight, it is evident that this was a case of failed selection process that fell through all the three levels of the process. The fellow seemed to have had a series of issues from his High School when he fell out of school and had to go and work as a house boy in order to survive. While this clearly portrayed determination, focus and tenacity which was necessary for him to overcome marginalization, the committee could have failed to realize that the above situation could have been as a result of a negative attitude/behavior or psychological problem. He was given a second chance to come back and study locally, but again fell out of class and did not inform the IP who found out only after visiting the University to make follow up. He had a very marginalized background on many factors, was a potential

54 leader, worked among very marginalized community, but the committee did not manage to see through him. As much as the selection process tried to achieve 100% success rate in selecting the right beneficiaries, some cases were not easy to capture in the application documents or through the face to face interview process leading to some aspects slipping through the cracks. It is this marginal number that became unsuccessful.

End of Fellowship/Repatriation/Re-entry The end of Fellowship period is an important period for both the fellows and the IP. The fellows must ensure that they complete their academic programs successfully, meet all the program requirements and organize for their trip back home to integrate back into their societies. The IP must guide the fellows in a manner as to make the repatriation process smooth. As expected, Fellows sometimes buried themselves in their academic work especially towards the end of their academic programs such that they failed to remember to request for their repatriation funds. We therefore reminded them two to three months before their grant end dates to send their repatriation documents consisting of a repatriation form and three different flight costs for one way air tickets back to their original destinations. After the IP received these documents, they were reviewed, approved and sent to IIE for processing of the funds. If the documents had some errors, the Fellow was requested to provide more information or documentation.

Around the end of the fellowships grants, some PhD students realized that their grant period was ending before they finalized their academic work and had to struggle to find sponsorship to enable them complete their studies. It was therefore a challenge for them to continue living in their host countries without stipend for their upkeep, insurance or tuition support. A few fellows were not keen on coming back home immediately after completing their studies wanting to try other scholarships to further their education, to work or do internships in the countries they had studied in. This was a challenge because they required new visa status which was not very easy to obtain unless they came back to their countries of origin first and later apply afresh. To ensure fellows communicated their end-of-fellowship plans, we sent them reminders through email communication. Some fellows were aware of what was required of them and when, while others needed prompting.

In order to support returning alumni with their professional and personal re-entry plans, all coming back alumni were provided with the update of alumni activities and how they could participate. They were also given alumni contacts and the alumni officials were requested to include the new alumni on any communication on the country alumni activities. Any alumni who requested for specific information, or needed specific support e.g. letters of reference and other support as per their needs, was attended to on a need based basis. Returning alumni were provided with contacts of relevant people, organizations, initiatives etc that could assist them to address some of their needs e.g. information including on job openings. These contacts were

55 their fellow alumni, other stakeholders, IFP partners etc. Some alumni got jobs through such interactions. Others received awards and funds for their community projects.

IFP deserves to be counted among the programs that provide more than adequate support to its fellows with re-entry issues. The IFP beneficiaries are mature people who possessed leadership skills and qualities right from the beginning of their fellowships. During the program, their qualities were enhanced further. On coming back from studies, the alumni come back at a higher level than when they left having acquired more skills, knowledge, networks, and exposure and confidence level. They came back into a network of fellow alumni who were equally widely networked, exposed and skilled on different matters. They joined their fellow alumni on the alumni association activities as they found their bearing which hardly took a long time. The alumni were also linked with their fellow alumni through different list-serves provided by IFP that gave them an opportunity to share knowledge. The above opportunities provided a wide range of platform for alumni to benefit from. Above all, the Alumni gained education, which is the greatest tool one can get for personal and community development. This fact continues to be expressed by each and every alumnus at every opportunity. One alumnus had this to say;

“The knowledge I have gained has made me to be a more qualified and skilled professional. I have as a result of this been appointed to offices like board of governors of the District education board and various schools where I have been contributing to shape the way education is managed for greater positive results” I have also been able to compete fairly in the job market; I was found to be knowledgeable and endowed with relevant skills for the job market. This is so beneficial to me personally since being a member of a marginalized community; it would have been very hard to compete without the skills and knowledge I have gained from the IFP program”

Between the months of May and June and September and October when most fellows from the USA and UK finished their studies respectively, the alumni officials sent out mail to welcome back home the new alumni as a way to reach out to them and help them resettle back. The new alumni were invited to the alumni association and requested to join by registering as members and encouraged to participate in the ongoing activities. Because communication is a two way activity, some new alumni picked up the welcome very well and stayed in touch with the local office, alumni officials, members of their cohort, fellow alumni they had met in their study institutions and fellow alumni whom they regarded as friends. This helped to foster a close alumni association and support for promoting Social Justice.

On coming back, it is obvious that fellows experienced both successes and challenges. Because the alumni came back at a higher level of skills and knowledge than when they left, they stood a better chance of being hired in more leadership positions than before. The alumni also had

56 higher opportunities for employment having studied abroad especially in this error of globalization. The alumni were of course more networked, confident and knowledgeable than their marginalized peers or communities. This meant that if there were any positions to be given to a particular community, alumni from such communities by virtue of their education and exposure would emerge the winner. This resulted in one of the alumni from the marginalized Ilchamus community competitively gain entry into the Kenya National Land Commission. This was a blessing in disguise to his community who are one of those communities that have suffered historical injustices including unfavorable land laws. For the benefit of people living with disabilities, another alumnus, totally blind joined the Teachers Service commission as a commissioner gaining an opportunity to represent the interests of learners with disabilities. These two examples are proof enough that alumni have made progress in the right direction that will enable them to influence policy towards promoting Social Justice. On the flipside, the alumni faced challenges resettling back due to culture shock. Some institutions or employers were threatened by the alumni newly acquired knowledge and skills and kept them at arm‟s length fearing losing their positions to the alumni. Some alumni felt that there was luck of systems or the systems were not transparent and were slow. Those who had to resign their jobs before leaving for studies were frustrated when they did not settle down into new jobs immediately upon coming back. Family and community responsibility and expectations sometime weighed heavily on the alumni making them more frustrated. Some faced the challenge of being rebuked by their peers who did not earn the scholarships but were working and making a contribution to their families and societies as opposed to the alumni who were back and hassling to get jobs. The positive side is that when they got employment, they were well placed in their organizations.

Alumni and Related Activities The Kenya IFP Alumni Association was registered in 2005 under the registrar of companies act. They elected their office bearers, drew their strategic plans and operated their bank account. They held one Annual General meeting per year to report on their activities, plan for new ones and welcome new alumni back to the country. They operated an active list serve which they used to exchange ideas and send information. They had a small secretariat in the IFP office which they used as a coordination hub. The alumni implemented community projects individually through their CBOs and as a group through funding from the Ford Foundation and IFP. Because most alumni are employed and based across wide geographical areas, they drew a lot of support from the IFP office in implementing their programs. As more alumni came back home, the alumni saw the need to operate more officially and legally with clear systems of handling their businesses. With the increase of ideas and skills back home, alumni started organizing themselves to source for funds from donors in different areas in order to implement projects that would continue to promote social justice. As stated earlier, the alumni are legally registered and have democratically elected office bearers in the positions of Chairman and deputy chair, Secretary and deputy secretary, treasurer and assistant treasurer, chair of

57 implementation committee and different committees in charge of different thematic areas. This team manages the alumni association affairs ensuring that their strategic plan is implemented.

The IFP Kenya office provided a lot of support in developing the alumni association. Right from the registration stage, the program hosted the alumni activities and the alumni who were back in the country by then, welcomed them and coordinated the registration process of the association. The small secretariat at the IFP offices served as a meeting point and coordination office for alumni activities. They were provided with technical support in all their activities and the staff also attended and made contributions during such forums. We worked to raise the profile of alumni by promoting their activities in the media, inviting them to our meetings to meet with partners and promoting their work through various means. We also provided alumni with management support especially when they are implementing the IFP funded projects like the Constitutional Empowering Project and the Alumni individual projects implemented in different parts of Kenya. IFP provided a lot of financial support to the alumni including funding the Alumni Annual General meetings. Some alumni were been featured in different publications sponsored by IFP locally and internationally as a means to showcase the achievements they had made in their communities. The first edition of the IFP Kenya alumni profile was successfully published in 2005 and the second edition featuring over 80 alumni was completed in 2012. Four alumni recorded a video capturing the positive impact they were making in their communities. This gave these alumni a tool for fundraising, mentoring others and for sharing their work with other relevant and important networks. IFP in 2011 sponsored a project in 18 counties in Kenya to educate the people at the grassroots levels on the new constitution. Most alumni remained active on their activities at the community level. At any given time, physically active alumni participation in the country alumni activities was 60%. However, the participation was much higher, around 80% considering those alumni who contributed their ideas by participating through the list-serve, the email and by phone.

Supporting alumni activities was not without some challenges. The fact that alumni were located in wide geographical areas of Kenya posed a challenge especially in coordinating and bringing them into one forum to achieve an objective. It was also a challenge sometimes to have such a big group to adopt a common position on a single issue. This required a lot of lobbying, explanations and convincing. However, the fact that the alumni had common understanding that had been built through their training at IFP, they were always guided by the one objective, promoting social justice. A big group like the alumni could not miss a few people whose selfish nature sometime outweighed the common good of the group. Those who displayed such characters were very minimal and their main reason was personal. However, it was a big step forward when the alumni association was registered with the registrar of Companies and to bring the alumni members together to select their office bearers, write their constitution, open a bank account and write a strategic plan. Coordinating the alumni to write a proposal to IFP for funding to implement the constitutional education project and coordinating the group to host a

58 public debate during the Kenya constitutional referendum were some success projects. Coordinating the publication of the second alumni profile and shooting the video showcasing the work of alumni in their communities was a good achievement. Managing 7 (seven) alumni projects implemented in different counties brought to reality the objective to enabling alumni to give back to their communities, a promise they made on winning the fellowship. Some of the lessons we leant are that the alumni members are a great resource in themselves and can achieve a lot of things if they are well coordinated. It takes just a few dedicated alumni members to move forward the agenda of the whole group. However, due to the loose nature of the association, it may be difficult for the alumni to achieve much without a coordination support.

If there was more time or financial resources to devote to alumni activities, we would establish a secretariat to coordinate the different resources the alumni possess and focus their expertise, knowledge and skills to address several development issues in Kenya. We would provide or lobby for funding to support the work of alumni from very marginalized or those working with such communities to further support the good work the alumni are doing to improve the lives of several people. This will ensure that the tempo IFP started is kept going in fighting social injustices in Kenya and the world. We in the Kenya office have registered an organization - International Fellowships Program (IFP) East Africa to further the work of IFP. We look forward to work with the alumni to make a positive change among the marginalized communities in Kenya through different interventions. We will approach different partners who are involved in promoting social justice for support to our course. Capacity building of the marginalized groups is our priority because sustainable development must come from inside rather than from outside. It is therefore more strategic to build the capacity of the marginalized people so that they can take charge of their own development agendas.

The alumni will most likely remain in contact after the program concludes however small the number of participating members may be. The fact that the association is legally registered with elected office bearers and established structures means that some members will always be in the office at one point or the other and this will motivate other members to continue with the work they started. These office bearers will continue carrying forward the mandate of the alumni. However, there is bound to be more active participation if the association gets new projects to implement. This will keep members engaged and provide them with an opportunity to serve their communities. The list serves – IFP global, East Africa and Kenya Alumni will continue to provide an opportunity for the alumni to interact with each other and to generate ideas to keep them going together. The projects that the alumni implemented gave them an opportunity to work together and to make impacts, networks and contacts. These projects have potential of replication in other areas in the future, upscale possibilities or recognition by other donors. Most alumni remain committed to IFP and have categorically stated that they will continue to uphold the Mission of IFP through the alumni activities and will forever promote the ideals and objectives of the program in their lives. Above all, the overall selection process, support during

59 study period and alumni activities are all one successful process. The next stage of alumni participation and cohesion cannot be different from the preceding stage since it is part of this successful system

The secretariat should continue to highlight the alumni achievements either as an association or as individuals as a way of letting other networks and partners know what is going on with the alumni and alumni associations in all the 22 countries. This will encourage other alumni to strive to do the same. Alumni should be supported to share with others the progress they continue to make within their communities. Where possible, alumni associations should be informed of any ongoing projects where they could apply and benefit from funds to enable them continue engaging in projects that promote Social Justice. Some annual competition, i.e. best profiled alumni association or most active, or most visited alumni association site are some means to keep the flag flying. Each alumni association should have a patron who can help bring them together and focus their activities. All these can keep the alumni engaged. If the secretariat is not able to organize this, then the Ford Foundation, even at the level of different regional offices can steer such activities.

As staff of the Kenya Program office, we are very satisfied with the level of alumni participation in IFP-related activities. Alumni are always willing to take part in IFP related activities. In Kenya, alumni have been actively involved in pre-departure meetings to share their experiences with the yet to depart fellows, Needs Assessment meetings to support FEs in their objectives settings, press conferences and reviews to promote IFP work amongst others. One landmark activity that the alumni were heavily involved in was the celebrations to mark IFPs 10 years of successful work in Kenya where they put up a very good show as the products of the program. The alumni do not hesitate to come forward to join the local office in any activity geared towards achieving IFP‟s objective of promoting social justice.

The alumni are well integrated across cohorts. This extends to the Alumni Association office bearers which was always a reprehensive of different cohorts at any given time. In 2012/2013, the chairman of the Association was a 6th cohort member. His assistant came from the 5th cohort. The treasurer was a member of the 4th Cohort while her assistant came from the 3rd cohort. The secretary was a 1st Cohort member and her assistant, 6th cohort. The committees consisted of members across the cohorts. There were members from the 8th cohort who were heading the implementation of the New Constitution project in their counties. So members of all cohorts integrated very well in the alumni network and were all well informed of the different activities the alumni are undertaking and contributed freely to any ongoing activities. This was possible due to the fact that fellows were able to contribute their views through the list serve even before they finished their studies. This ensured that when they come back as alumni, they were already familiar with some alumni and were not shy to relate with alumni group. The different activities that took place during Needs Assessment, orientation and pre-departure

60 helped alumni to see themselves as members of the same family focused on a similar agenda hence the ability to integrate well without considering the different existing cohorts.

The IFP alumni have various positive impacts on their communities and country at large. Many of the alumni are role models in their communities where some are the first to attain graduate education especially International Higher Education. They started projects in their communities that benefitted the community or improved their lives. Some of the challenges they addressed in their communities included but not limited to health, water, food security, FGM, girls‟ education and economic empowerment. The alumni contributed towards the constitutional making processes in Kenya i.e. hosting members of the public to a debate on the constitutional referendum on the implementation of the new constitution. There is a good representation of the alumni in the institutions of Higher learning in the country where many of them are members of faculty in different Universities. Although many alumni are serving as faculty members at Universities in Kenya, including Moi, Nairobi, Kenyatta, Catholic, USIU Universities amongst others, one notable case is that of the Director of Nazarene University, the City Campus. It is great to know that an IFP alumni, has competitively risen to the level of a Campus Director. Finally, at policy level, the alumni have gained access to elective positions that will give them more opportunity to hold high positions of responsibility where they can influence policy matters. In total, eight alumni have been elected or nominated to different seats in Kenya during the 2023 general elections. All of them represent much marginalized communities from Kwale, Kuria, Pokot, Turkana, Ilchamus and people living with disabilities who have constantly been neglected by the Government and leaders who have come before. There is great hope that if the Alumni get elected, positive change is on the way for these communities.

Relationship with Other Actors in the IFP System The interaction between the local office (IP), in this case the Kenya office and the IFP Secretariat was on a daily basis. This was aimed at ensuring a successful program implementation process starting at the selection stage, Needs Assessment, PAT, Placement, Monitoring, and finally the Alumni stage. The interaction focused on IFP policies implementation in supporting the program implementation success. The local offices helped to translate and simplify the policies for better understanding to the fellows and other stakeholders like the selection panel. The IP was the link between the fellows and the IFP secretariat and hence relayed any information the secretariat wanted to reach the fellows and vice versa. As IPs, we kept the records of all the fellows and provided any information to the secretariat that was required. The interaction also focused on the local office management and administration in order to provide effective support to the program implementation. The interaction was cordial, open, two-way and very supportive. Communication was with everyone in the team based on the responsibilities of their offices.

Interactions with other regional partners within East Africa were more close and frequent than with other IPs from the other regions because of the common activities implemented regionally.

These included Pre-Departure orientations, regional consultative meetings, and alumni activities. All partners from the region came together to support one another during the planning and execution of regional activities. Interactions were on overall programmatic issues and one partner may request for support from the other IP whenever necessary. Because the East Africa region is homogeneous, the IPs also discuss possibilities of joining efforts to address challenges common to the region e.g. pastoralist communities, Lake Victoria, regional trade etc. The interaction was also on non official issues, i.e. on friendly and cordial basis. Interaction with other IPs apart from those in the East Africa region was minimal. It was restricted to particular issues as may be necessary. Once in a while when a fellow or alumni from a different region wanted to visit another region where IFP had a presence, there would be communication between the IPs for assistance in such circumstances. We also hosted other IPs from outside East Africa, mostly during Africa Regional Meetings. During such occasions, there were interactions in organizing and coordinating such specific activities. During the application process, communication with other IPs were focused on regional institutions or activation of selected regional institutions for fellows i.e. who chose to study in South Africa. We also maintained communication with partners from outside the East Africa region on programmatic issues now and again to bench mark on activities, seek opinions and support. Friendly communication also existed with other IPs.

The interactions with Placement partners were very intensive during the placement period. This was because the IP is the link between the Universities and the student throughout the Placement period. It touched on issues to do with placement requirements, arrival at host Universities and Countries, tuition payments and any special conditions of fellows. We worked with the Placement Partners to ensure the students got the right admission to the courses that met their study objectives. Interaction with IIE was more intensive because they doubled up as grant administrators apart from the Placement Partner for North America and Canada. It was on a daily basis with a focus to provide effective and efficient monitoring to the fellow‟s academic and social lives during their entire fellowship period.

IIE provided adequate and timely support in the management of Fellows grants. The records were always up to date which ensured no issues fell through the cracks. For efficiency, IIE took the responsibility to remind IPs on any issues that could have been overlooked. IIE also sent out updates on issues or general reminders on new Policy matters. The IP acted as the go between for Fellows and IIE during all the stages. The IP provided all the required information on the fellows to enable IIE to process documents, funds or services to the fellows. IPs also worked with the Fellows and their Academic advisors to monitor their academic progress and advised IIE on the same. IPs worked with the fellows to ensure they met their responsibilities during fellowship period and provided this information to IIE.

To a greater extent the above relationships functioned smoothly and effectively. We were complimentary to each other and roles did not conflict. Each partner played the role they were best placed to play. Each partner also played their roles professionally thereby giving the whole process a harmonious and very effective flow of activities. The relationship was perfect as the policies were clear on how each partner related with the other and were guided by clearly defined roles.

The regional and global meetings served as great forums for IPs to meet and know one another well, making it easy for partners to consult one another on various matters even through phone and email. The meeting also helped to provide more light in understanding programmatic details in different regions of the world. It gave the IPs an opportunity to interact with each other, share ideas and also a chance to relate with the Secretariat, Grant administrators, IFF board and placement partners. We had an opportunity to exchange ideas with our international colleagues and to learn new ones. These meetings were opportunities for partners to consult on program matters sometimes not easy to discuss on email or on phone and for sharing common issues resulting in improved program implementation. In general, these were forums where IPs, the secretariat, placement partners, Board of directors shared our success stories, challenges and way forward for the growth of the program. The presence of the board members was a sign of support from this highest office to the IPs. This was an encouraging gesture that served to create a strong linkage from the grassroots to the top organ of the program because the board members also had an opportunity to hear from those like us based at the grassroots.

IFP Policies IFP policies on individual cases were very consistent and were very fair. The policies applied to everyone across the board, this led to effective application of the policies and respect for the same. There were no favors or discrimination. All beneficiaries were taken through the program policies right at the beginning of the process giving them an opportunity to organize themselves within the provided framework. All these enabled the program to move ahead efficiently and effectively without instances of pending issues, backlogs or delays. The only policy that created a challenged now and then was the three year grant period for PhD fellows. It was sometimes difficult for fellows to complete their studies within three years. In such circumstances, especially in the UK, some fellows were unable to receive tuition waivers or TA positions, making it difficult for them to complete their studies. At times they would also not be in a position to renew their visas to continue staying at the host institution or come back home and finalize their studies by communicating with their supervisors online thereby creating some difficult moments. Of course fellows would have wanted the fellowship sponsorship to cover them and their families and to allow them to take their families along. But interestingly, after successfully completing the mandatory one semester, no one revisited the issue of taking their families to the US. The fact that fellows had to first travel alone to their host institutions and

63 understand the lifestyle abroad was a very effective way to enforce this policy because fellows experienced for themselves the realities. This helped them make the decision that it would not be possible to take their families with them and support them financially and succeed academically. Another challenge fellows encountered was the use of the health insurance. The fact that fellows had to first meet the cost of their medical services and later claim from the insurance firm was cumbersome and difficult since fellows sometimes lacked cash to pay for such services. It was also sometimes not easy to contact the insurance officials, whose offices were mostly located abroad, depending on where a fellow was at a particular time. Sometimes fellows did not know when to use the University provided health insurance or the IFP one. On some occasions, a fellow would incur expenses or require medical services and due to proximity, decide to use the University services. On one occasion, a fellow was denied services for a long time as each Health Insurance argued on who should take the responsibility.

All IFP policies were well intended and addressed particular important aspects of the program. They all had good intentions and worked to ensure that all the programs‟ aspects fell into place leaving nothing unattended to or to chance. IFP was well thought out and its policies were very supportive to the overall success of the program implementation. If there was a chance to implement another IFP, I would adopt the policies as they are because of their ability to address each and every aspect and stage of the program. The policies reinforced the program‟s objective of social justice because it treated all the beneficiaries equally. I would only make minimal adjustments to the grey areas like Health Insurance and three years grants for PhDs. In general, all the IFP policies gave an equal chance and treatment to all the beneficiaries making IFP one of the most transparently and objectively implemented programs.

Communications/Public Dissemination of the IFP Model IFP Kenya office produced many communication materials and participated in many forums both through the media and through other forums like meetings. Alumni were fully involved in some of these media and publicity activity. IFP‟s program information traversed all geographical locations of Kenya. Every effort was made to penetrate the areas presumed inaccessible with information. We made an effort to use other available infrastructure i.e. the church, the provincial administration, the vernacular language radios, alumni, and fellows, amongst other to be able to spread the word on IFP. This is an area where IFP did better than other scholarships programs that used the mainstream media and their beneficiaries only to disseminate its information. As a result of this, IFP became the most competitive scholarship in Kenya attracting an average of 1000 candidates per year. Many people had marked January as the application period and if they missed the call for applications advert, they would pay a visit to the office, make calls or send email. Each January, we received a constant flow of inquires on when the fellowships announcement would be out. We also received applications throughout the year from Kenya and from other countries in the region i.e. Ethiopia, Burundi, Sudan amongst others. Many people marveled at the IFP fellowship because they thought it was a comprehensive

64 program like no other and wanted to be part of it. Many were surprised at how IFP went out to look for beneficiaries and laid open their award processes. This was a plus in IFP and gave people confidence in the program. Some candidates who did not qualify were satisfied with and appreciated the whole process and how IFP conducted its selection process. Below are some of the videos that were produced within the course of IFP implementation in Kenya. - Videos: “Keeping the promise” documenting 4 alumni members together and each one of them on their own to showcase their community work. - Specific alumni videos on special occasions and events captured on Kenyan media houses including video of Dr Joan Dassin talking about IFP, the alumni launching the report of the survey on the knowledge of the Kenyan population on the new constitution, celebration of Kenya‟s 10 years of success in Kenya, Pre-Departure meetings videos. - Videos capturing Outreach sessions.

We have also produced the following publications; - Alumni profiles: Keeping the promise Volume 1 and 2 - Spear meets the pen- featuring community activities of an alumni from the Maasai community - A Brief on IFP – IFP program brief in Kenya - Brochures - Posters - Program Summary publications - A lot of still pictures

The following are articles/stories published/broadcast in the local media. - IFP Annual calls for scholarships award. - Program History and Achievements - Alumni Profiles - Alumni Projects – Constitutional Project and Education Project on the New Constitution

We presented IFP results in the following channels - Presented through the electronic press - Presented through the print press - During stakeholders meetings - During Pre-Departure meetings - At Outreach activities

Different audience attended our activities including people interested in applying for the IFP scholarships award – target group, Alumni, stakeholders in the education and development

65 sector, Ministry of education officials, members of the civil society and experts from across section of professions. The messages that went out through the media reached all types of audiences since these Media channels reach a wide range of populations.

In all the communications, the message communicated was mainly to highlight IFPs main objective of promoting Social Justice amongst the marginalized and the whole of Kenya by extension. As the program highlighted the fact that we gave a chance to the marginalized individuals and groups to access higher education and to strengthen their leadership skills, we re- enforced our commitment to social justice promotion role. The main themes in the stories published/broadcast in the local media were supporting Higher Education, Leadership development, Promoting Social Justice, Transparency, Equal opportunities, Community Development amongst others.

IFP generated very high interests in Kenya probably more than any other scholarship programs because it was a unique program in terms of its target group, opportunity to study in any area in any part of the world, no restriction on age limit, supported placement services, very generous benefits e.g. Family Fund, amongst others. The number of applicants grew each year even when we tried to do a more focused outreach targeting only areas that the scholarship had not effectively covered. The aspects that were very prominent included the above mentioned areas that made IFP appeal to many people than other academic scholarships which were considered elitist, academic oriented and non transparent in their award criteria. The fact that IFP widened the term “academic excellence” to include community service, leadership skills other than academic potential made the program unique hence endearing it to a wide pool of people. The main audiences for the presentation of IFP results were target groups and other stakeholder‟s e.g. CBO, NGOs, Ministry of Education who could help support the program in its implementation, partners and potential donors. The target group always responded more favorably as they stood to benefit from the program directly.

Program Evaluation To continuously improve certain aspects of program implementation, we held consultation sessions at the end of each selection process with the committee members to receive their feedback on the process. At such forums, we collected the committees‟ views and incorporated them into future selections processes. We also had a brief session before the start of each process to review the tools and take any necessary actions. We learnt from our colleagues in the region or outside the region about their best practice which we built into some of our implementation procedures. We considered FEs‟ and Alumni views very seriously and used some of their comments to improve our procedures. This was through exit interviews and by listening to their questions or feedback on various areas. Although IFP concludes in 2013, no external evaluation has been commissioned. Such an evaluation would have served to reveal the extent to which IFP

66 had been successful in meeting its objectives particularly in Kenya and what impact it created. However, this role has been handled by CHEPS in all the IFP offices globally.

In Kenya, IFP is already being felt in various parts of the society and levels by virtue of the alumni activities. A number of Alumni from different parts of Kenya have received support to implement projects in their communities. One such alumnus who studied Development at Clark University, USA and comes from one of the most marginalized communities has, the Ilchamus received International awards to implement a rainfed farming project in her community. Others have been appointed to high offices including one fellow studying Public Policy at Duke University who was competitively elected into the United Nations Youth Advisory Board. Others are serving in the country‟s commissions including the Kenya National Land Commission and the Teacher‟s Service Commission and as heads of Government departments and other organizations. One thing these Alumni have in common is that they attribute their successes and achievements to the support they received from IFP that enabled them to learn new skills, acquire new knowledge, networks and confidence and their focus being on promoting social justice. The way things are progressing, we believe that we are yet to see more positive impact of the program in the country. It would therefore be appropriate to conduct a country level evaluation in order to know the actual impact of the program in Kenya. Because countries are not similar in all aspects i.e. on how they categorize “marginalization”, this type of evaluation would enable IFP to capture certain specific aspects of a country and the impact of the program on the same. It would be worthwhile to evaluate the impact of the fellowship on the beneficiaries and their communities locally and nationally. It would be worth examining whether the impact that IFP has made would have been achieved by any other kind of Higher Education scholarship other than IFP specifically? There are many scholarship awarding programs in Kenya, how are these programs different from IFP? Although the glaring differences between IFP and other scholarship programs are evident, more analysis especially on the impact to the beneficiaries, institutions where they studied, their contribution to society, impact on the implementing institutions, to higher exudation in general and other scholarship programs is worth studying. Other factors like return rate and re-entry should be examined. Marginalization issue is a concern for the whole world as a factor of social injustice and IFP should be examined on how it has addressed this. As a leadership development program, what is the specific contribution to leadership development on its beneficiaries and the country at different levels? From the donor‟s point of view, it may be important to evaluate if the program was worth the investment, Return on Investments ROI

The survey data from the finalist questionnaire was very important because it provided key data on the fellows and alumni that helped in making some decisions and providing clarity about the beneficiaries and alumni without going back to them each time. This was very important because of the information it generated which enabled the program to be effectively administered

67 and succeed in various areas. Above all, the data provided clear information that enabled the program to evaluate how far it was meeting its objectives especially on the target group.

IFP emphasized on the formative evaluation. This was achieved through fellows‟ reports that they sent to their IPs. The enrolment report, academic term reports, different requests, all ensured that fellows‟ processes were closely monitored and fed back into the program to make it more effective and efficient.

Conclusion/Open Space IFP‟s overall impact in Kenya is great. The program has taken root and will continue to grow as the alumni also grow in their leadership positions. The impact is evident in individual alumni, their families, extended families, communities and the whole country. The impact is through the alumni individual interventions, including role modeling to members of their communities. The alumni association has been involved in different projects including the Kenya New Constitutional project that has seen the alumni members take the initiative to provide education on the new Constitution to grassroots populations in 16 counties. 7 (seven) alumni have also received funding to address challenges being faced by their communities in different areas. These projects are going to bring about a lot of sustainable positive change to the benefitting communities. The alumni have also had very positive contributions to the institutions where they are based. They have contributed their knowledge, skills and commitment leading to improved ways of conducting business. Having had an opportunity to study and network with people and institutions from other regions, the alumni have brought home “international” standards way of doing things hence creating a positive change. They have improved in areas like advocacy, research, presentation, fundraising, networking, management, all of which are factors of success in any institution. The value addition created by the alumni has also greatly benefited small grassroots CBOs and the communities they serve. The skills that the alumni have put to these grassroot organizations have seen them grow in size and mandate to serve the communities in various areas. At the individual level, the alumni have achieved higher level of confidence, have become more knowledgeable, networked and exposed. Some alumni have gained international experiences and are now holding international jobs. Others have been appointed by the President to head Government departments and others have entered the political arena. Kenya is implementing a new Constitution that is going to devolve all systems to the Counties. It is a key moment for the countries to have qualified personnel in various sectors if this system is going to succeed. IFP alumni, especially from the marginalized counties where only a few people have had a chance to earn higher education are taking up the challenge to lead their communities during this crucial moment. This last level of engagement will crown the other levels of participation that the alumni have been involved in because it will enable alumni an opportunity to contribute to Policy matters of the country. We have hopes that the effects of IFP can only get stronger in Promoting Social justice. The pace that this crop of alumni have set

68 is a good foundation that other positive impacts are expected to build on with the alumni expected to keep their “Promise”.

Almost all institutions of Higher Learning in Kenya today have IFP Alumni as members of their faculty. The Kenya‟s Education sector at all levels has immensely grown. In the last two months alone from the beginning of 2013 alone, the President of Kenya has given full charters to 10 (ten) Universities and according to Government plans, this trend will continue upwards. One great concern in this positive move is the lack of well trained faculty members to serve in these institutions to provide quality education. Well trained lectures are few and are overstretched shuttling between the different Universities some located in cities 500 Kms apart. This scenario is a recipe for compromised quality because lecturers have to deal with very big numbers of students than they can manage. It also leads to poor supervision of students resulting in delayed completion of programs especially for Masters and PhD programs. With a limited number of qualified supervisors, higher degrees like PhDs continue to diminish due to lack of new entrants. IFP alumni therefore have a very important role to play in the rapidly growing Kenyan education sector. The alumni have brought their new skills, knowledge, improved ways of imparting knowledge and commitment to these institutions. Because the student numbers is big, IFP stands a great chance to influence the Kenyan educational system positively in a large way.

After implementing IFP in Kenya for the past ten years, many lessons have been learnt. IFP has proved that many people in Kenya have potential in them that has not been explored or tapped. Specifically, these are communities and individuals marginalized by different factors including economic status, gender, Geographical environment, disabilities, culture among many. These groups of people have historically been left out of the mainstream educational system. They have been “written off” and viewed as lacking in any qualities or means necessary for attaining education, especially quality Higher Education. However, through IFP it has become evident that people from the marginalized communities are the way they are because of lack of opportunities. When provided with relevant and necessary support, they will perform as well or even better than their counterparts from more developed areas. IFP revealed the level of disparity in the distribution of resources to the people of Kenya with some communities having a raw deal in public resources distribution. This has affected Education access in a major way. For instance, practically every child in Central province attends primary school compared to about one out of three children in North Eastern (Limo, 2012). Unequal access to all levels of education unfortunately is a basic characteristic of the educational system in Kenya (DPMF, 2012). This has led to regional, class and gender differences in the country. For instance, illiteracy among females is almost twice that of males, about 22% and 14% respectively. While 91.8 % of females around Nairobi are literate, only 6.4% are in North Eastern Province and about 93% have no education at all. Overall, 70% of illiterate people in Kenya are female. This leaves women to make up the 75% of the Kenyan agricultural and labor workforce. Women‟s wages are also two- thirds that of males (Limo, 2012). These statistics shows gross gender inequalities in the country.

IFP has affirmed that challenges faced by a particular community, especially the marginalized communities can only be better understood, appreciated and addressed by one of their own. Development must come from within before others are involved. It is only the insiders who can tell the world about their issues. Due to the harsh environmental conditions and lack of infrastructure mostly experienced in marginalized areas, Kenyans from other areas, especially affluent regions are reluctant to work in the marginalized areas. It therefore means that these areas are always lacking in most services, including basic ones like education and health because a very limited number of their own are themselves qualified, and yet their regions are shunned by others. This scenario is worsened at this time when Kenya is devolving its systems. The marginalized communities will be left behind as other regions take off in to development. The few people who are educated and have the required skills, experience and training have to multi task and work very hard. This is a factor that has been witnessed in the IFP alumni from the marginalized regions. They have gone back to work in their communities to promote Women‟s rights, girls education, peace among warring tribes and clans, economic empowerment, good Governance, etc. The alumni operate beyond their professions because their communities look up to them for solutions to everything. We also learnt that once people are truly committed to particular courses, whether in their communities or in their jobs, they will ensure that they do what it takes to achieve success in those issues. This is evident considering the high return rates of the alumni and more so back to their communities or their areas of work. It is proof that the selection process went right and that the beneficiaries were the right target group. One of the alumni who chose to study locally did so for the benefit of his community. He knew that if he left Kenya for two years to go and study abroad, his community will suffer because they looked up to him for solutions to most of their challenges. Although he has worked on mentoring others, the community feels safer with his leadership. The leadership positions the alumni hold in their communities may not be at high levels e.g. political, but what matters is the impact they have achieved in various areas that impact directly on the lives of their community members.

The overall success of IFP in Kenya can be attributed majorly to the transparent and objective selection process. The preparation through PAT before fellows left for their studies is also a distinguishing factor of IFP. The monitoring and support the IFP fellows received while studying was a key success factor of the program. IFP therefore stands out as a program that effectively met the needs of its target group with a focus to enable them achieve their individual objectives and the bigger Program objective of building the capacity of the marginalized people through education to enable them become more effective leaders. The foregoing has contributed in making IFP alumni mindful of their communities who work hard to make the world a better place to live in their own small ways. These lessons distinguish IFP from other scholarship awarding programs in Kenya which are more academic oriented and hardly impact grassroots communities directly.

The East African region took a break in 2004 and did not select candidates. The break was taken in order to review the first three years of the program and take stock of what had been achieved, any challenges experienced and focus on the future. One issue that came up during this period of break was the need to establish country offices and decentralize the program from Uganda under IUCEA. The program was growing and the award slots were increasing. Alumni were starting to come back and there was need for more outreach in each country to enable information about IFP to reach the desired target groups. All these were becoming a challenge for IUCEA to manage. During the break, other activities e.g. PAT for the 3rd cohort members went on as planned and Kenya hosted the Pre-Departure orientation for the East African 3rd Cohort members. Some changes were made in the Program implementation processes. Needs Assessment was one such activity that was changed in order to be conducted on a group and residential basis as opposed to the individual basis that was used before. This was to allow for cohort building to start early for the FEs at a national level. External subject experts and speakers on different subjects were also incorporated in the subsequent FE activities. Academic advisors from different study regions came to talk to the FEs about the details of studying in these regions. Most of these activities were held on residential basis giving the FEs opportunity to bond with one another. Generally the program found time to address some of the teething challenges that had been realized in the initial stages. The new offices established in Kenya and Tanzania enabled the program to reach its target group more effectively than when the regional office was based in Uganda. The newly recruited country staffs were familiar with their respective countries‟ education and marginalization status and the geography. This made it easier for them to conduct an effective outreach in Kenya and Tanzania as had been achieved in Uganda. This enabled information about IFP to be received in not only most parts of the country, but to those places specifically occupied by the marginalized people. Breaking from the earlier tradition of regional selection committees, each country constituted its own country selection teams. This was an improvement to the process because such committees consisting of local experts understood the country‟s educational systems much better and were knowledgeable about the different factors that constituted a successful selection process.

IFP was implemented in 22 (twenty two) countries worldwide. As part of this global team, colleagues at the secretariat in New York, placement partners, institutions of higher learning, educational experts from different regions, a lot was learnt as gains and challenges. We had a great opportunity to learn and exchange ideas with colleagues from all over the world that enriched our knowledge base on issues like marginalization, higher education access, leadership, culture, amongst other. We were privileged to meet people from many parts of the world that has become very valuable part of our professional network. The network gave us an opportunity to become part of a bigger family fighting for a just course; Social justice for all. Being part of an international group with a similar agenda made us to look at issues from a wider perspective than from the narrow country basis. This was value addition to our country programs that benefitted from this wider perspective of things. Belonging to the bigger IFP team taught us to

work hard and to be responsive. Because the program progressed as one big process in all the countries it was implemented in, there was little room to lag behind because this would come with repercussions to our fellows. Because we carried the responsibilities of our fellows on our shoulders, any slight oversight would affect our fellows drastically in areas like University admissions, class attendance or course registrations, missing allowance, etc. These were enough to affect the fellows‟ performance and the overall program performance.

On implementing IFP, many lessons were learnt. One is that human beings are all the same on the face of the earth. But on second level, we learnt to appreciate the differences that existed between different people. Environment shaped people differently and this was anchored in their needs, perceptions, attitudes, feelings etc. For our beneficiaries, who were from the marginalized communities, a balance had to be found in order to serve all of them equally and satisfactorily. We learnt the act of patience, humility and tenacity. We also learnt to appreciate, commend and to encourage because the fellows needed these given the difficult circumstances most of them had come from. We became role models for the fellows, a fact some of them have acknowledged in their profiles. A fellow who was denied a visa to the USA, put on the waiting list to South Africa and was on the verge of giving up studying outside Kenya had this to say;

“However, IFP provides fellows with enough choices on universities worldwide „to literally spoil themselves with‟. IFP‟s outstanding placement and monitoring program thus kept my spirits high even after missing out on the study opportunity in New England USA. The IFP fraternity persisted on until I got it at the University of Leeds in the „aboriginal England‟, directly on the opposite shores of the Atlantic”

We realized that most beneficiaries had not interacted with people outside their communities and were reserved at the beginning of the program process. But as time went by, they relaxed and opened up exposing the other positive side in them. We realized that these people had so much talent, potential, knowledge, skills etc that if they receive the right support, they could bear great impact. Our duties went beyond the official responsibilities to ensure that we provided the much and relevant needed support to the beneficiaries to enable them succeed. The work became a calling that we committed ourselves to. We are today satisfied that we have made a substantial contribution to the Kenyan Higher Education sector and to the lives of many marginalized people in Kenya. This is evident from levels and sectors where IFP alumni are based and the great contributions that they are making in Government, in NGOs, at institutions of higher learning within their communities etc in the Kenya today. Working for IFP exposed all of us to a big and international team. While belonging to such a big team consisting of people from different cultures, knowledge and experiences is empowering and sharpens our skills on lobbying, negotiation, presentation, etc, if one is not well focused, they can feel lost, ignored or misunderstood. We also learnt and understood the rules of playing in a team. As members of

72 one team, we had our team leader who guided us towards achieving the objectives. For all of us to succeed, we knew that we had to support each other and to play our roles effectively. From New York to Kenya, to Thailand and to Russia and finally to Mexico, the IFP operated like the complementary parts of the body complementing and supporting one another. Together we stood! And together we succeeded!

Appendix: NEEDS ASSESSMENT TOOL

PREFERED LANGUA COMPUTER SKILLS REPORT WRITING,

REGION GE PRESENTATION AND TESTS RESEARCH SKILLS

North GRE Ms Word America/Canada

Europe (including TOEFL Ms Access UK)

Australia/ Asia GMAT Ms Excel

Africa IETLS Power Point

OTHER Internet/email and surfing

COMPUTER SKILLS ASSESSMENT FORM

Kindly fill in this assessment to enable us determine which course will be best suited to you.

Name: ______Organization: ______Direct tel. number: ______Email: ______

Microsoft Windows

Yes No Have you used any computer before? □ □ Have you used a mouse? □ □ Have you used Microsoft Windows before? □ □

I don’t I know a know little I have a I know I don’t need what this about good idea all about this is this what this is this Use the Mouse □ □ □ □ □ Use the Start Menu □ □ □ □ □ Save a File □ □ □ □ □ Open a Saved File □ □ □ □ □ Windows Explorer □ □ □ □ □ Find Files and Folders □ □ □ □ □ Print a Document □ □ □ □ □ Copy a Document onto a Floppy □ □ □ □ □ Disk Create a Folder □ □ □ □ □ Change the Default Printer □ □ □ □ □ Create a Shortcut □ □ □ □ □ Add a Programme to QuickLaunch □ □ □ □ □ My Briefcase □ □ □ □ □ Startup Folder □ □ □ □ □ Scandisk & Folder □ □ □ □ □

Comments ______

How long have you been (if applicable) Which version do you use? e.g. (if applicable) using Microsoft ______’95, 2000, etc. ______Windows?

Microsoft Word

Yes No Have you used Microsoft Word before? □ □ Have you used a typewriter? □ □ Are you familiar with other Windows or Mac OS □ □ programmes? I don’t I know I have a know a little good idea I don’t what this about what this I know all need this is this is about this Create, Save and Open files in □ □ □ □ □ Word Bold, Italic & Underline □ □ □ □ □ Cut Copy & Paste □ □ □ □ □ Automatic Numbers & Bullets □ □ □ □ □ Line & Paragraph Spacing □ □ □ □ □ AutoText □ □ □ □ □ AutoCorrect □ □ □ □ □ Tables □ □ □ □ □ Borders & Shading □ □ □ □ □ Mail Merge □ □ □ □ □ Macros □ □ □ □ □ Create Templates □ □ □ □ □ Footnotes & Endnotes □ □ □ □ □ Styles □ □ □ □ □ Cross-References □ □ □ □ □ Index & Table of Contents □ □ □ □ □

Comments ______

______

How long have you been (if applicable) Which version do you (if applicable) using Microsoft Word? ______use? e.g. ’97, 2000, etc. ______

Microsoft Excel

Yes No Have you used Microsoft Excel before? □ □ Have you created a formula in any spreadsheet programme? □ □

I don’t I know I have a I know I don’t know a little good idea all need what this about what this about this is this is this Create, Save and Open files in Excel □ □ □ □ □ Enter Text and Numbers □ □ □ □ □ Cut, Copy & Paste □ □ □ □ □ Absolute Cell References (with $ □ □ □ □ □ symbols) Customized Toolbars □ □ □ □ □ Sort □ □ □ □ □ Goalseek □ □ □ □ □ Linking Worksheets □ □ □ □ □ Protection □ □ □ □ □ Subtotals □ □ □ □ □ Create & Format Charts □ □ □ □ □ Filter □ □ □ □ □ Pivot Tables □ □ □ □ □ VLookup & HLookup □ □ □ □ □ Macros □ □ □ □ □

Comments ______

______

How long have you been (if applicable) Which version do you (if applicable) using Microsoft Excel? ______use? e.g. ’97, 2000, etc. ______

Microsoft PowerPoint

Yes No Have you used Microsoft PowerPoint before? Are you familiar with other Windows or Mac OS programmes? I have a I I don’t I know good know I don’t know a little idea all need what this about what about this is this this is this Choose a template Create a slide Format Text Use Clipart Create Organization Chart Create Table Create Graph Transitions Drawing Animate Objects Animate Graphs Create Templates Create Hyperlinks Pack and Go Action Buttons Comments ______

How long have you (if applicable) Which version do you (if applicable) been using Microsoft ______use? e.g. ’97, 2000, etc. ______PowerPoint?

Internet & Email

Yes No Have you used the Internet before? Have you used email before? I have a I I don’t I know good know I don’t know a little idea all need what this about what about this is this this is this Enter a Web

Address Links History Folder Use a Search Engine Set your Home Page Favourites Use Secure Servers Work Offline Email Attach Files Address Book Child Protection Comments ______

How long have you (if applicable) Which browser are you (if applicable) been using the Internet? ______most familiar with? ______

Comments. If you have any comments, or you would like a different computer training course to suit your needs, kindly add those comments in the space provided below: ______