Total participants present: 32
Total forms collected: 22

1. PLEASE DESCRIBE IN WHAT WAYS THE WORKSHOP DID OR DID NOT MEET YOUR EXPECTATIONS.

1. The workshop far exceeded any of the expectations I came with.


2. Excellent process and content however expected to see higher level representatives.


3. More attention on strategic planning is needed.


4. I have an action plan to take to my country to make a difference (even though little).


5. The messages got home.


6. I had no expectations - however it was novel, informative and impacted to increase my information base, my awareness and sense of commitment.


7. This workshop was very challenging for me as a person and my organization as a whole. My expectations were truly met.


8. Yes. Information on pages 14-23 in booklet is useful. Meeting and sharing with colleagues.


9. I was unaware of HIV/AIDS as a major social problem. My greatest expectation was to gain information.


10. Met overall expectation and I feel re-fueled.


11. The workshop went beyond my expectations and brought to the fore some very useful information.


12. The workshop met my expectations.


13. The workshop met my expectations: the actual statistics were compelling; strategies to mitigate HIV/AIDS were discussed.


14. Did: topics covered; personal involvement; awareness.


15. Met most of my expectations. It did not only in one way: I expected more epidemiological and social-economic impact discussion.


16. The workshop allowed me to work together with other sectors represented at the workshop and to hear how they view their particular sector of Government as having to play a key role in responding to the epidemic so that we can achieve that multi-sectoral approach.


17. I expected this workshop to be more academic not personal. It was difficult to deal with but good. I came expecting a more project/programme/strategy emphasis addressing multisectoral implications. The economic impact was not fully addressed to my expectations.


18. Exceeded expectations in exposure to HIV/AIDS and its potential impact on development.


19. Expanded planning knowledge; provided exposure to the organisational planning skills needed to make my organisation a success.


20. It did cover my expectations since I came with the idea of identifying way to (...) a link between my sector and the HIV/AIDS issues.


21. Facilitated participants (...) of the need for HIV/AIDS.

2. IN YOUR OPINION, THE FOLLOWING TOPICS OR PROCEDURES WERE NOT COVERED AND SHOULD BE COVERED IN FUTURE WORKSHOPS.

1. More time needed to develop appropriate strategies to mobilise political will (as begun by Carol Jacobs); regional strategies to reduce the impact of HIV/AIDS.


2. Strategy for evaluating programmes.


3. The role of the law as it relates to HIV/AIDS.


4. I could be useful to have discussion on some of the issues that (...) difficulty to the process of (...) the epidemic - a sort of brainstorming that is solution oriented.


5. Babies born to HIV parents.


6. There was the assumption that all participants knew basic information about HIV/AIDS e.g. exposed as infected. A glossary with usage should be generated e.g. cocktails, safety net.


7. A little focus on the individual.


8. Role of the Government at top level.


9. Strategies to influence "political will" should be covered in grater detail since the political directorate makes policy decisions and allocate resources.


10. 3 days is not enough time to cover everything. In my opinion you have chosen the right topics.


11. Epidemiological and impact presentation and discussions, particularly if senior Government officials and other top policy-makers are included as participants.


12. I felt that the topics covered were adequate and applicable to the workshop. Given a 3-day period I don’t think that additional topics could be covered in any meaningful manner.


13. Would have wanted more details in how to develop strategies to use in sensitising politicians and other policy makers on the epidemic. Would have appreciated on hands training (...) economic forecasting of the epidemic.


14. Management of technical terms to facilitate the understanding.

3. IN YOUR OPINION, THE FOLLOWING TOPICS OR PROCEDURES SHOULD BE COVERED IN A BETTER AND DIFFERENT MANNER IN FUTURE WORKSHOPS.

1. Issue of confidentiality needs to be handled differently.


2. Develop strategies to address difficult issues/obstacles e.g. establishing political will; dealing with confidentiality; stigmatisation/discrimination; resource mobilization.


3. (...) work sessions.


4. In terms of procedure more time should be given to address the topics.


5. Statistical aspect needed more clarification.


6. Interpretation of data.



7. Beans! Beans! Beans! Too traumatising.


8. More time to the strategic analysis & planning.


9. A workshop with VIPs.


10. Counselling a person living with HIV/AIDS.


11. A matter of confidentiality; matter of reporting: make sure that everybody is participating and people who report are not always the same people.


12. Spend more time on the Centre of Analysis exercise.


13. The topics covered were conducted in a manner so that one was able to participate and share experiences.


14. "The Centre of Analysis" - give more time so that all the questions could be answered; "Cross Impact Analysis" - the methodology was not very effective; "The Economic Impact" - a good presentation, needs more time and should be done during an early morning session; Reading the data could have been better.


15. Types of solutions to present/limit the spread of HIV/AIDS especially at the policy level.


16. Securing the political will; the big drain: the real economic impact of HIV/AIDS on Barbados’ development.


17. Management of data and information.

4. PLEASE SHARE WITH US YOUR COMMENTS ON THE WORKSHOP PROCESS.

1. Issues handled in an informative yet informal atmosphere, which in my view helped the participants to open-up.


2. Experiential approach was optimum.


3. Well organised.


4. The workshop was very educational.


5. Good.


6. To persons who are not directly involved with the programme, we moved too quickly.


7. Recapping previous session, closure/wrapping up. Illustrations used in the family cycle, creating the family, personal reflections (...), involvement of 2 countries (as a manageable strategy).


8. The process was logical - moving from information gathering, to chaos and finally to providing means of finding solutions.
9. Liked the tight time keeping, less waste of time.


10. I have no complaints - very technical ease to understand the central idea.


11. The process was adequate. Perhaps a field trip visit to a relevant department would have broken the monotony of the plethora of group discussions.


12. No comment: process o.k.


13. It took us (...) into the (...) facts and allowed plenty room for discussions and information (...).


14. A participatory dynamic which ensures that every participant had an opportunity to share ideas, suggestions and explore solutions where appropriate.

5. PLEASE SHARE WITH US YOUR COMMENTS ON THE PERFORMANCE OF THE FACILITATION TEAM. WHAT SUGGESTIONS DO YOU HAVE TO IMPROVE THIS PERFORMANCE?

1. Facilitation - all dynamic people sessions were informative; participatory.


2. Sincerity, attention - grabbing, interesting.


3. Congratulations!


4. The facilitation team performed excellently.


5. Good, but some need to be more in tune with their area of responsibility.


6. The team performed well. Training O.K., Coordination O.K.


7. The team did excellent in the way they presented their topics with humour, seriousness when necessary and enthusiasm.


8. General communication was clear and effective. Teamwork was evident. Established rapport.


9. The facilitators were extremely helpful and supportive.


10. Good performance. I enjoyed the back up e.g. if a facilitator did not get "through" another one took over (for a while) and the process was carried on.


11. The team was well prepared but the time constraint did lead to some rushing.


12. Excellent.


13. The facilitation team was excellent.


14. Good facilitators; one problem: time-aspect. Not always able to finish the exercises properly.


15. Experienced, professional, well prepared, in addition to being knowledgeable about the Caribbean issues and realities first hand.


16. The team worked well, supporting each other in the process.


17. The facilitation team was great in their performance leading us through the guiding principles and ensuring that we have tools to accomplish the given tables.


18. The team worked well however the methodology used with the topics identified at (3) above will have to be reviewed.


19. The facilitation team was well chosen and did a good job in assisting the conduct of the workshop.


20. A good job generally. Claudette and Stewart were particularly good.


21. Great team. Went well (...).


22. Collectively the team did an excellent job in clarifying and empowering participants. However, there is a need for a more focussed approach to group facilitating by some.

6. WHAT ARE YOUR COMMENTS ON THE GENERAL CONTENT OF THE WORKSHOP?

1. Issues were diverse yet all inter-related which I hadn’t thought about previously.


2. Content - excellent although a little repetitive at times. More work needed on presentation on economic impact - it is a very important presentation.


3. Inspiring and educating.


4. Very good.


5. Very good.


6. Content. Well taught and however it could have (...) in some area, and expanded in others.


7. The content was good it dealt with real issues.


8. Relevant, timely, clarifying, informative.


9. The topics dealt with during the workshop generated so much (...) that, most times, the discussions were not exhausted.


10. Good.


11. Very well thought out and well presented.


12. Excellent - dynamic, update, technical, point of view O.K.


13. The content was generally adequate.


14. Perfect.


15. Overall very good.


16. The content of the workshop was very detailed however user friendly and therefor has helped to achieve stated objectives.


17. The general content was good. I think however organisers need to decide whether it will be experiential or a planning workshop. Time did not allow for multi-sectoral impacts to be fully addressed even though it was put forward in this manner.


18. Good.


19. Given the time constraints, the range of topics chosen were good. More, so, we had a chance


20. share our experiences and relate to the topics. Comprehensive. However it took for granted that the participant were already familiar with the terms.


21. Very good.

7. HOW USEFUL DID YOU FIND THE APPROACH USED AND THE PROCESS TO DELIVER THIS APPROACH?

1. The approach unique from other workshops I attended - recommended that this approach be used for all follow-up workshops.


2. Excellent.


3. Very realistic.


4. Very useful.


5. O.K.


6. The use of diagrams and table was useful but sometimes the idea intended might have been clear to the facilitator but not too clear to the participants also what was required in may instances was for too much for the time allocated for instance the 15 year change and questions.


7. Very useful.


8. A number of novel approached, ice-breakers, time-management techniques etc. which could be used for follow-up workshops.


9. The approach allowed me not only to focus on HIV/AIDS as a social/development issue but also to understand how to get involved with the planning required at a national level to deal with HIV/AIDS.


10. Very well.


11. The approach encouraged full participation and this was further enhanced by the informal setting.


12. Very useful - every one of the facilitators knew what they were doing.


13. The approach was good. Perhaps videotapes and a field visit would have been helpful.


14. Approach was very useful since it introduced personal element in the planning process.


15. While the approach was very well coordinated the time for processing was somewhat rushed.


16. The approach was effective however it may be necessary to allocate more time so that participants do not feel rushed and have time to examine and derive full benefit from all the activities.


17. It encouraged participation.


18. Good. The approach was very interesting, different. At the end it achieved the objective but in a different way.


19. Very useful. The process (...) to team to think rather than team things.

8. OTHER COMMENTS ON THE WORKSHOP: ORGANIZATION, MATERIALS, LOGISTICS, AMBIANCE

1. Materials were excellent in general - some accuracy problems with the epidemiological fact sheets - country data needs to be updated - gaps in data can be filled by countries (...) to workshop.


2. Good.


3. Ambiance good, organisation good, material good. Logistics - more space in between (...).


4. In order for more meaningful participation and allow persons to think through issues perhaps this workshop should have been for one week.


5. Somewhat cramped. Sometimes rushed. Generally, very good. Adequate materials before and during workshop need to pay some attention to visiting participants. Someone should have been responsible for assisting such participants in terms of finding meals and other necessities.


6. I liked that this din NOT happened:


7. That participants presented themselves, Prof. & inst.


8. That facilitators presented themselves


9. So, we could just listen to e.g. Stewart, without knowing his labels.


10. Further attention could be paid to the fact that participants are drawn from organisation with varying roles and not all are directly involved in the prevention or eradication of the HIV/AIDS epidemic.


11. Everything O.K. This workshop has opened more my mind about this big challenge HIV/AIDS.


12. Good.


13. Suggestion: to give more detail information in advance instead of sending only reports.


14. This workshop was very well organized. What was most impressive was that the facilitators actually went through the actual exercises that we’ve been through. The materials used complemented the content and the activities that were required.


15. There were some topics which were particularly effective such as creating a family, the centrality of behavior, the impromptu role lay etc. the testimonies were very unexpected. Two were enough. I don’t think more are necessary. The wildfire exercise was effective. The workshop caused me to reflect on my own altitude to people on the whole since you never know what problem people have. I think I will have a more compassionate altitude.


16. Organisation - good; logistics - good; material - good; ambiance - very good.


17. Conference rooms are always cold (...).


18. Good organisation and logistics.

9. WHAT DID THE WORKSHOP MEAN TO ME?

1. Increased my sensitivity even more to the trauma of HIV infection and the amazing strategies developed to live with it!


2. Personally, this workshop served to enhance my knowledge on HIV/AIDS and relating issues (...).


3. Emotional impact; still in shock; but overall the workshop was stimulating and interesting.


4. Personal opinion: sessions were too short and rushed.


5. It brought the problem closer. It impacted greatly with regard to the importance of the problem. I t allowed me the understanding of the need to act. I appreciated interacting with the facilitators and participants.


6. Tested HIV positive is not a death sentence, persons can continue to lead productive lives and this has bought new learning to my work.


7. Being able to accept the multi-sectoral approach to respond to the epidemic; appreciating how crucial confidentiality is in the whole process; an eagerness to respond /take action immediately.


8. For me, it has been a learning experience, but, it drew too heavily, on my emotions.


9. The workshop broadened my knowledge of the epidemic and revealed the need to change my approach on a professional and personal level.


10. Personally, I learnt a great deal from this workshop in terms of facts (...) and strategies for effective mitigation for AIDS/HIV.


11. Personal involvement; increased how (...) on AIDS at a personal level; rich experience, especially with the involvement of people infected with the HIV.


12. Personally: I found the personal and family plan of action useful.


13. Stimulating.


14. Personally this workshop was a stimulating, and fruitful one. I’ve gained a lot of knowledge which can certainly help to make a difference in the way we can sensitise those key persons one need to reach with a view to gain their support.


15. The workshop has "opened my eyes" in a new way to HIV/AIDS especially to the fact that it is around me and that I can be affected. If not controlled the impact on the economy could be devastating.


16. I had a helluva good time.


17. Understanding and involvement in a problem that even though we receive information, seems to be far from those that are not (...) involved.


18. Greater awareness of the impact of the epidemic.