Course Report Jamaica Nov 2009

‘Effective project planning and evaluation in biomedical research’

A skill-building course developed by TDR

The University of the West Indies,

Kingston, Jamaica 3-5 November 2009

COURSE REPORT

Trainers: Linda Pereira, Beatriz Ferro and Ligia Gómez

Course report – Jamaica, November 09 Page 1 of 22

REPORT CONTENT

Report summary in English

1. Course context

a. Purpose of the course and how does it fit in the organizing institution programme? b. Trainers background and experience in running the course

2. Course organization and preparation

a. Prior-communication with participants b. Organization of co-training c. Organization of logistics

3. List of participants

4. Project summaries (short paragraph)

5. Agenda

6. Time management

7. Course assessment

a. Summary of plenary session

b. Summary of questionnaires assessment

8. Lessons learnt and recommendations

9. Identification of potential new trainers

10. Additional comments

Appendix A: Analysis of questionnaires for participants (1 single file)

Appendix B: Questionnaires for trainers including self-assessment (1 single file)

Appendix C: Project documentation developed at the end of the course (1 single file)


Report Summary This skill-building course on “Effective Project Planning and Evaluation in Biomedical Research” (EPPE) was organized and supported by the University of the West Indies (UWI), Clinical Epidemiology Unit (CEU), in Kingston, Jamaica from November 3rd to the 6th of 2009. This was the first skill building course organized in the Caribbean, and it represents a first step in integrating the EPPE course at UWI and potentially disseminating the methodology in the region. Other parties also played a role by supporting the course, including: the Pan American Health Organization/World Health Organization (PAHO/WHO), UNICEF/UNDP/World Bank/WHO Special Programme for Research & Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR/WHO), and the International Center for Medical Research and Training (CIDEIM) in Cali, Colombia. The course was run by Linda Pereira (PAHO), Beatriz Ferro (CIDEIM) and Ligia Gomez (CIDEIM), with 12 participants from UWI and one observer, Donald Simeon, Director of the Caribbean Health Research Council. The participants were organized in four groups, each group consisting of three members. The course was scheduled for 3.5 days, but due to an incredibly focused and receptive group of participants, all steps of the agenda were completed in 3 days. At the end of the course, the participants expressed that their expectations for the course had been met, that they were looking forward to applying the methodology to their work and sharing it with their larger teams, and seven of the 12 participants expressed interest in becoming trainers.


1. Course context

a. Purpose of the course and how does it fit in the organizing institution programme? CIDEIM was selected as a WHO/TDR Regional Training Center (for the Latin American and Caribbean region) for the Planning for Success Initiative in 2007. As such, CIDEIM conducts both EPPE skill-building and Train-the-Trainer courses in order to strengthen project management capacity among researchers and related administrative personnel, and propel the dissemination of the EPPE methodology. The EPPE methodology was first introduced to CIDEIM by Dr. Beatrice Halpaap in early 2007. Since then, CIDEIM has integrated EPPE concepts and tools into its internal processes for research development, planning, implementation and evaluation. CIDEIM has led a total of eight EPPE skill-building courses with the participation of 130 individuals - 100 from CIDEIM and 30 from network institutions (including this most recent course at UWI). The methodology has been disseminated to faculty and staff in five Colombian institutions (University of Valle, Javeriana University, Universidad of Rosario, Federico Lleras Acosta Dermatological Center, and Center for the Study of Pediatric Infections), and four institutions in Central American and the Caribbean (Hospital Escuela and National Autonomous University of Honduras; Pontificia Catholic University of Ecuador; and the Pedro Kouri Institute of Cuba). At this stage, 14 CIDEIM staff and investigators from the Pedro Kouri Institute in Cuba (1), the Hospital Escuela from Honduras (1), the Federico Lleras Dermatologic Center (2), and the Universidad del Valle (1). In addition to the courses hosted and conducted by CIDEIM, the EPPE skill-building course is being offered once each semester by Professor Lyda Osorio, MD, PhD, CIDEIM Associate, as an extension course at the Universidad del Valle. The UWI-CEU comprises the Epidemiology Research Unit (ERU) in the Tropical Medicine Research Institute (TMRI), UWI and colleagues from the Faculties of Medical Sciences and Social Sciences, and the Centre for Gender and Development Studies of the UWI. Together, they have been admitted to the International Clinical Epidemiology Network (INCLEN) as a Clinical Epidemiology Unit (CEU) of the Canada/ USA International Clinical Epidemiology Network (CanUSACLEN) branch of INCLEN. UWI’s involvement in strengthening of health research capacity through the EPPE methodology is part of their integration into INCLEN. With this initial skill-building course, the objectives are:

1. To prepare the groundwork to position the Clinical Epidemiology Unit at the University of West Indies (ERU) as a reference and training centre on research project management for the Caribbean, and as node of the network of the TDR Planning for Success initiative in the Americas.

2. To replicate the Effective Project Planning and Evaluation in Biomedical Research workshop advancing 3-4 ongoing research projects selected by ERU

3. To strengthen effective project management capacities amongst health researchers in the Caribbean.


4. To identify researchers who will be further trained to become “trainers” in project management in order to improve the project management capacity among researchers in the Caribbean

5. To increase the skills and competencies of Caribbean researchers for knowledge translation to policy and influence the curriculum of research training centers to include project management skills that benefit coming generations.

b. Trainers background and experience in running the course Linda Pereira participated in the EPPE skill-building course conducted at PAHO by Dr. Beatrice Halpaap (TDR) and Dr. Lyda Osorio (CIDEIM, Universidad del Valle). She then participated in a shortened TTT course led by Dr. Halpaap at PAHO in December 2007. This TTT course was immediately followed by a skill-building course at PAHO led by Linda and another colleague from PAHO, with Dr. Halpaap as an observer. Beatriz Ferro participated in the initial EPPE skill-building course led at CIDEIM by Dr. Beatrice Halpaap in February 2007. She was subsequently trained as a trainer at CIDEIM in June 2008. Since then, she has led four skill-building courses and one TTT course. Ligia Gómez participated in a skill-building course led by Dr. Halpaap at Yale University. This was a shortened version of the course, targeting Master’s students. She then participated in the first TTT course held at CIDEIM in June 2007. Since then, she has led two skill-building courses and one TTT course. 2. Course organization and preparation

a. Prior-communication with participants Prior communication with the course participants was coordinated through the UWI contacts (Professor Rainford Wilks, Shelly McFarlane and Novelette Campbell). Upon confirming the dates for the course, a teleconference was held with the UWI leads, Luis Gabriel Cuervo and Linda Pereira from PAHO, and Ligia Gómez from CIDEIM to discuss the preparation process for the course. All logistical needs for the course were coordinated with the UWI contacts. Course participants and projects were determined approximately two weeks before the start of the course. Once this information was available, the trainers sent an introductory email to all participants on Tuesday October 20th (13 days before the start of the course). This email served to introduce the trainers, present the objectives, format and expected outcomes of the course, and request that participant groups develop very brief presentations of their projects for the first day of the course. b. Organization of co-training Once the dates for the course were confirmed, the three trainers held two teleconferences in order to discuss course participants, logistics and division of course modules. Since two trainers are based in Colombia and one in Washington, D.C.,



many details related to course preparation were discussed over email. In addition, the trainers traveled to Jamaica one day in advance, which was spent familiarizing themselves with the course location, reviewing that all logistical details were in place, and reviewing/practicing course content. c. Organization of logistics Course logistics were organized by trainers (with Ligia Gómez taking the lead in communications) and the UWI contacts. A course logistics checklist was developed and shared with the UWI contacts, who then took care of all arrangements related to course location, tea and lunch orders, flipchart and markers, necessary photocopies, and the installation of Microsoft Project on the five computers to be used during the course. The three trainers developed the course agenda based on their past training experiences and were sure to have this approved by the UWI team. Beatriz Ferro and Ligia Gómez developed the course nametags, diplomas, as well as an initial ice-break exercise.

3. List of Participants “Effective Project Planning and Evaluation in Health Research”

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS Jamaica, November 3-6, 2009

No. PROYECT TITLE PI TEAM

MEMBERS DEGREE/

PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND

TITLE ON THE PROJECT E-mail

Damion Francis

MPhil /PhD Candidate MSc. Nutrition, Clinical

Nutritionist

Research Assistant [email protected]

Colette Cunningham-

Myrie

MD, MPH , Medical Doctor , Public Health

Specialist Co- Investigator [email protected]

.jm 1

The Jamaica Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) [Proposal]

Rainford Wilks

Novelette Campbell

CPS/ CAP Cert. Business Studies , Asc Business Studies

Administrative Secretary [email protected]

Rainford Wilks

DM, MSc. FRCP (Edin)Professor of

Epidemiology/ Consultant Physician

Investigator [email protected]

Novie Younger

PhD Applied Statistics MSc Biometry Statistician [email protected]

2

The Impact of Diabetes on Morbidity and All-Cause and Cardiovascular Mortality in the Caribbean and an Evaluation of Health Provider Practice in Respect of CVD Risk Reduction in Diabetic Patients [2nd Stage for Funding]

Rainford Wilks

Erika Ellis

BSc Psychology/Sociology; MSc Applied Psychology; Senior Admin Assitant, Institute for Gender and Developmental Studies

Senior Administrative

Assistant

[email protected]



Trevor Ferguson

MD, DM, MSc , Edpidemiologist , Internal Medicine

[email protected]

Georgiana Gordon-Strachan

PhD Biochemistry Senior Lecturer ,

Faculty of Medical Sciences

Co-Investigator [email protected]

3

The Burden and Cost of Diabetic Foot Complications among Patients Attending a Specialist Diabetic Clinic in Jamaica [3 months into implementation]

Trevor Ferguson

Cassandra Wint

BSc Management Studies, Diploma Business Admin.

Canadian Diploma Business and Finance

CPS

Administrative Secretary [email protected]

Marshall Tulloch –

Reid

MD, MPhil, DSc, Endocrinologist &

Epidemiologist Investigator [email protected]

Shelly McFarlane

Medical Technologist , Biochemist, Research

Fellow, , MPhil Candidate

Coordinator [email protected] 4

Primary Prevention of Diabetes in the Caribbean- Adapting the Diabetes Prevention Programme for the Caribbean [Proposal under 2nd stage of review]

Marshall Tulloch-

Reid

Dawn Stephenson

MSc Nutrition Nutritionist

PhD Nutrition Candidate

Research Fellow [email protected]

4. Project summaries Group 1 Participants: Rainford Wilks, Novie Younger and Erika Ellis Title: The Impact of Diabetes on Morbidity and All-Cause and Cardiovascular Mortality in the Caribbean and an Evaluation of Health Provider Practice in Respect of CVD Risk Reduction in Diabetic Patients Summary Aims

1. To estimate the impact of the increased prevalence of diabetes mellitus (DM) in the Caribbean on Cardiovascular Disease (CVD) mortality and morbidity using multiple data sources

2. To estimate the prevalence of CVD risk factors in patients with DM and the extent of provider adherence to guidelines for their treatment.

Objectives 1. Estimate the frequency of diabetes mellitus appearing on death certificates of

adults in the period 1995-2005. 2. Estimate the impact of diabetes on mortality in a pre-established cohort of

persons, initially age 25-74 years in Spanish Town, Jamaica 3. Estimate the frequency of diabetes mellitus among admissions for CVD to four

large hospitals in the Caribbean - the University Hospital of the West Indies (UHWI-J), the Kingston Public Hospital (KPH-J) and the Spanish Town Hospital (STH-J) in Jamaica and the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Barbados (QEH-B).

4. To estimate the frequency of CVD and CVD Risk Factors among admissions with DM to four large hospitals in the Caribbean - the University Hospital of the West Indies (UHWI-J), the Kingston Public Hospital (KPH-J) and the Spanish Town Hospital (STH-J) in Jamaica and the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Barbados (QEH-B).

5. Estimate the frequency with which risk assessments (through measurement of serum lipids, creatinine, microalbuminuria or proteinuria and obtaining of electrocardiograms) are conducted in diabetic in-patients and out-patients at the UHWI-J, KPH-J and STH-J and QEH-J.

6. Estimate the frequency with which risk reduction measures are undertaken in diabetic in-patients and out-patients at the UHWI, KPH and STH (through use of statins, aspirin, and angiotensin converting enzyme [ACE] inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs].

Group 2 Participants: Marshall Tulloch-Reid, Shelly McFarlane, and Dawn Stephenson Title: Primary Prevention of Diabetes in the Caribbean – Adapting the Diabetes Prevention Program for the Caribbean Region


Summary: Aim 1 – Modification of the GLB protocol for use in the Caribbean.

a. Bringing together key stakeholders from the region and consultants from the University of Pittsburgh Diabetes Prevention Support Centre (DPSC) to review the an existing group lifestyle balance (GLB) program and adapt as appropriate for Caribbean culture

b. Delivery of the 2 day training workshop for staff who will be involved in the delivery of the intervention using the revised protocol

c. Piloting of the revised patient material and feedback from community on the modified teaching materials

Aim 2 –Assessment of the feasibility and effectiveness of the GLB program in 2 settings.

a. Pilot program in two settings – one urban an one rural setting: The protocol will be piloted in 2 consecutive groups of patients (a maximum of 15 patients in each group) in each centre. The intervention will be administered over a 12-15 week period (approximately 3 ½ months) by trained preventionists followed by nine, monthly group support meetings (up to a year after starting the programme). Weight will be measured at each session.

b. Assessment visits at baseline, post-intervention and at the completion of 1 year (measures to be collected are addressed below).

Aim 3 – Evaluation and planning for sustainability

a. Conduction of post GLB focus groups with patients and providers b. Evaluation of focus group input; identification of barriers c. Planning for large scale implementation and strategies to overcome any identified

barriers Group 3 Participants: Trevor Ferguson, Georgiana Gordon-Strachan, and Cassandra Wint Title: The burden and cost of diabetic foot complications among patients attending a specialist diabetic clinic in Jamaica Summary: Project Aim:

To estimate the prevalence and direct costs of diabetic foot complications among patients at the UHWI diabetes clinic and to identify risk factors associated with these complications

Objectives: 1. To estimate the prevalence of amputations, diabetic foot ulcers, active foot

infections and foot deformity among persons attending the UHWI diabetes clinic.

2. To estimate the prevalence of peripheral vascular disease and peripheral neuropathy among persons attending the UHWI diabetes clinic.

3. To evaluate the relationship between foot complications and diabetes control (measured by HBA1c).

4. To evaluate the relationship between foot complications and foot care practices

5. To estimate health care cost for persons with diabetic foot complications



Group 4 Participants: Colette Cunninghma-Myrie, Damion Francis, Novelette Campbell Title: The Jamaica Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) Study (part of a multi-centre study of CKD) Summary: Specific Aim 1: To determine the prevalence of CKD in representative populations of Jamaican Blacks (JB) (Jamaican Health and Lifestyle Cohort) and African Americans (AA) (NHANES 2002-2006) Hypothesis 1: There will be differences between AA and JB in the age and sex-specific prevalence of CKD and traditional CKD risk factors (hypertension, diabetes mellitus and obesity) Specific Aim 2: To determine and compare the rates and determinants of CKD progression in US CRIC and Jamaican CRIC cohorts

Hypothesis 2: The rates of CKD progression will be different between AA and JB partly because of varied environmental, socioeconomic and nutritional factors which have already been implicated in CKD progression. In addition, CKD treatments are likely to be different between AA and JB and this may also contribute to differences in CKD outcomes in an unpredictable direction. American Blacks (African Americans) have a 3-4-fold greater risk of end stage renal disease (ESRD) compared to Caucasians in the United States and the factors which explain the disparity are unclear. The data from other black populations are not readily available but many of these populations including Jamaica have a significant burden of the risk factors for ESRD. This excess renal disease burden among blacks in the USA occur despite: (1) there is no AA vs. White difference in the prevalence of early stages of chronic kidney disease (CKD) prior to the onset of ESRD; and (2) aggressive therapeutic intervention in two leading causes of chronic kidney disease (hypertensive nephrosclerosis and focal segmental glomerulosclerosis) appear to have similar short-term efficacy in both African Americans (AA) and Whites but is seemingly insufficient to depress the tendency for accelerated CKD progression to ESRD observed in AA. It is unknown whether other Black populations share these paradox and greater predilection to ESRD seen in AA. In this context, we postulate that comparative evaluation of the etiologic mechanisms and determinants of CKD progression in AA and another well characterized cohort of Blacks with CKD can shed insight into the relative contributions and interactions between etiology, treatment, diet, behavior and socioeconomic factors to the CKD outcomes in AA. We propose to study a sub-cohort of AA in the ongoing NIH-funded CRIC study as well as an incipient CKD cohort of Jamaican Blacks (JB) from the Jamaica National Health & Lifestyle Survey II to accomplish the above specific aims and tests of hypotheses.

“Effective Project Planning and Evaluation

In Health Research” Skill-building Course

UNIVERSITY OF WEST INDIES, Mona, Jamaica

November 3-6, 2009

Agenda

As the course is using a ‘learning by doing’ approach based on a step-by-step process, full attendance from all participants is a prerequisite for its success. Tuesday November 3, 2009 8:30am – 9:30am • Welcome – Introduction and Overview of the Course 9:30am – 10:00am • Module 1: Good Practices in Biomedical Research 10:00am – 10:30am • Module 2: The Concept of Planning in Health Research 10:30am – 10:45am • Break 10:45am – 11:15am • Group presentations regarding projects (3 slides/5 minutes max) 11:15am – 11:30am • Module 3: Defining the purpose and scope of the project. Project statement and goal 11:30am – 12:30pm • Group work: Establish project goal and statement. 12:30pm – 1:30pm • Lunch 1:30pm – 2:30pm Presentations and discussion: Goal and statement for each team


2:30pm – 2:45pm • Module 3: Defining the purpose and scope of the project. Objectives and indicators 2:45pm – 4:00pm • Group work: Defining objectives and indicators. 4:00pm – 4:15pm • Break 4:15pm - 6:00pm • Presentations and discussion: Objectives and indicators for each team Wednesday November 4, 2009 8:30am – 8:45am • Module 3: Defining the purpose and scope of the project. Main steps. 8:45am – 9:15am • Group work: Defining main steps. 9:15am – 9:45am • Presentations and discussion: Main steps for each team 9:45am – 10:15am • Module 4: Establishing the Project Development Plan 10:15am – 10:30am • Break 10:30am – 11:15am • Gantt chart demonstration 11:15am – 1:00pm • Group work: Gantt chart 1:00pm – 2:00pm • Lunch 2:00pm – 4:00pm • Group work: Gantt chart 4:00pm – 4:15pm • Break 4:15pm – 5:30pm • Group work: Gantt chart


Thursday November 5, 2009 8:30am – 9:00am • PERT chart demonstration 9:00am – 10:30am • Group work: PERT chart 10:30am – 10:45am • Break 10:45am – 1:00pm • Presentations and discussion: Gantt and PERT charts 1:00pm – 2:00pm • Lunch 2:00pm – 2:30pm • Module 5: Implementing and Evaluating 2:30pm – 4:00pm • Group work: Defining team, communication framework and reporting plan 4:00pm – 4:15pm • Break 4:15pm – 5:30pm • Group work: Defining team, communication framework and reporting plan Friday November 6, 2009 8:30am – 10:00am • Presentations and discussion: Team, communication framework and reporting plan for

each team 10:00am – 10:15am • Break 10:15am – 12:30pm • Course discussion and evaluation (questionnaire) • Next steps • Course closing and certificates 12:30pm – 1:30pm • Lunch


6. Time management All steps of the methodology were completed and as is customary, the first day was slightly longer, as originally scheduled. The step by step process flowed very well in terms of: small group brainstorming and development of each phase; sharing and reflecting; presentation and discussion of the project statements, goals, objectives, indicators and main steps. By circulating among the four small groups of three, to be available for questions and for assessing progress, the facilitators were very impressed with the participants’ comprehensive development of each assignment as we moved into Phase I. The participants were extremely focused and actually progressed ahead of schedule with much of the small group work, particularly when developing and drafting the objectives, indicators as well as Gantt and PERT charts. Additionally, it was very helpful that they worked in the same technical area and were previously familiar with each of the projects. Therefore the dynamics of the interactive stages flowed especially well. For these reasons, the time required for working on each assigned part of Phase I and II did not always take as long as originally programmed. However, the timeframe for presentation of the Gantt and PERT charts was completely utilized and it included very thorough and positive feedback from the entire group. By the afternoon of the second day, it became evident that there was a good possibility for completing the workshop the following day. Due to the logistics, since lunch was provided within the conference room (breaks were kept to a minimum for the same reason), it had also been possible to shorten the original time allotted. Therefore, upon agreement by all, as indicated in the real-time agenda below, the course was successfully completed within a full three-day period.

Real-Time Agenda Tuesday November 3, 2009 8:40am – 9:20am • Welcome – Introduction and Overview of the Course 9:20am – 9:50am • Module 1: Good Practices in Biomedical Research 9:50am – 10:25am • Module 2: The Concept of Planning in Health Research 10:25am – 10:45am • Break 10:48am – 11:05am • Group presentations regarding projects (3 slides/5 minutes max) 11:05am – 11:15am • Module 3: Defining the purpose and scope of the project. Project statement and goal 11:15am – 12:00pm • Group work: Establish project goal and statement.


12:00 – 12:30pm • Presentations and discussion: Goal and statement for each team 12:30pm – 1:35pm • Lunch 1:35pm – 2:28pm • Presentations and discussion: Goal and statement for each team 2:28pm – 2:43pm • Module 3: Defining the purpose and scope of the project. Objectives and indicators 2:43pm – 4:00pm • Group work: Defining objectives and indicators. 4:00pm – 4:20pm • Break 4:20pm - 6:00pm • Presentations and discussion: Objectives and indicators for each team Wednesday November 4, 2009 8:40am – 8:50am • Module 3: Defining the purpose and scope of the project. Main steps. 8:50am – 9:20am • Group work: Defining main steps. 9:20am – 9:40am • Presentations and discussion: Main steps for each team 9:40am – 10:30am • Module 4: Establishing the Project Development Plan 10:30am – 10:50am • Break 10:50am – 11:40am • Gantt chart demonstration 11:40am – 12:45pm • Group work: Gantt chart 12:45pm – 1:45pm • Lunch 1:45pm – 3:30pm • Group work: Gantt chart


3:30 – 3:53pm • PERT chart demonstration 3:53 – 4:15pm • Group work: Gantt and PERT chart 4:15pm – 4:30pm • Break 4:30pm – 5:30pm • Group work: Gantt and PERT chart Thursday November 5, 2009 8:45am – 11:00am • Group work: Gantt and PERT chart (working break included) 11:00am – 1:50pm • Presentations and discussion: Gantt and PERT charts (working lunch included) 1:50pm – 2:10pm • Module 5: Implementing and Evaluating 2:10pm – 3:43pm • Group work: Defining team, communication framework and reporting plan 3:43pm – 4:40pm • Presentations and discussion: Team, communication framework and reporting plan for

each team 4:40 – 4:50pm • Break

4:50pm – 5:20pm • Course discussion and evaluation (questionnaire) • Next steps • Course closing and certificates


7. Course assessment 1. Summary of plenary session • In general, the participants stated that their expectations for the course, which primarily

revolved around strengthening their project management skills, were met. • Several of the participants were very honest in sharing that they initially were resistant to

participating in the course, either because they had already been involved in project management training or because they had been executing project management tasks for a significant amount of time and felt that they likely had nothing else to learn. Despite these preliminary doubts, participants expressed that they were happy they had attended the course because it had provided them with a new, holistic understanding of project management, and very concrete tools.

• Some of the participants came from a non-biomedical science background, and therefore were concerned that the course would not be particularly relevant to them. At the end of the course, they felt that the methodology and tools can be applied to any type of research project.

• Participants felt that the course allowed them to visualize what a project plan should actually look like, what specific elements (such as objectives, indicators, main steps and milestones) should be contemplated. Having this clear picture of what a project plan is and the process to develop it helped the participants realize that they usually do not go through a formal planning process but instead jump straight into implementation.

• Some participants coming from a research perspective felt that the course helped them understand what a project manager does, and how demanding and crucial this role is. Furthermore, they felt the course provided them with the tools to better interact and communicate with project managers.

• The participants were very receptive to the MS Project software as a new tool for creating Gantt charts which could be easily modified throughout the life of a project.

• Participants were very satisfied with the course materials. They felt it was useful to have the PPT slides in the manual, as well as the step-by-step guide for the applied work.

• The participants welcomed the flexibility of the training approach and expressed that the trainers were engaging, patient, and honest about questions to which they did not know the answers.

b. Summary of questionnaires assessment Please see Appendix A


8. Lessons Learnt and Recommendations • Identifying operational contacts at the institution hosting the course was essential for the

efficient preparation of the course. In this case, having three contacts within UWI involved in the coordination of course participants and logistical details was extremely effective.

• It was beneficial to have a trainer from PAHO for the course in order to promote more active involvement of this regional entity in the EPPE dissemination process.

• Professor Rainford Wilks (head of the CEU) was present during most of the course (he could not attend the last day due to illness) and highly committed. His involvement promoted high levels of energy, focus and buy-in among the participants, and will hopefully lead to integration of EPPE concepts and skills in the CEU research activities.

• In this case, the fact that all of the participants were part of the same unit and were accustomed to working together was very positive. The participants understood each other’s work and were therefore able to contribute in clear and meaningful ways. At the same time, the participants were comfortable with and respectful of one another, which contributed to a very conducive learning environment.

• Flexibility on the part of both trainers and participants was essential during this course. The participants were very receptive to course concepts and extremely focused during the course. Therefore, both the theoretical and applied sessions went fairly quickly. The fact that trainers and participants worked together to adapt the schedule based on the group’s rhythm of work was very important and contributed to the course being a success. The adequate amount of time was allotted to each part of the course, without any groups feeling rushed or any sessions being dragged out to the point that participants lost interest.

• Related to the point above, this experience provided evidence that the EPPE skill-building course can indeed be conducted in three days without leaving out any modules and still providing ample time for group work and discussion. The duration of the course will of course depend on the participants’ familiarity with one another and receptivity to the EPPE concepts. In this particular case, it was also quite helpful that the UWI teams had thought about the research questions, aims and objectives of their projects prior to the course, and therefore came to the course with a very clear understanding of what they were trying to accomplish (although still flexible and open to applying the EPPE concepts and rethinking aims and objectives that they had already established).

• Based on past experience by CIDEIM trainers, Module 3 was divided in such a way that group work was done after each main concept was presented (instead of the full theoretical material being presented before group work). This is clearly laid out in the course agenda. This was helpful because it made Module 3 much more dynamic and allowed participants to think through and apply each concept before moving on to the next. We recommend this format for future courses.

• All of the UWI groups included a mix of administrative and research staff. This allowed for the integration of diverse perspectives, and the acknowledgement of the importance of the different roles on the team. It was important for the trainers to keep these different roles and responsibilities in mind as they assessed each individual’s level of participation during the course. For example, the administrative personnel were perhaps less actively involved during the discussions related to the project objectives and indicators, but were quite vocal during the sharing of main steps and Gantt and PERT charts.

• The UWI participants expressed interest in learning about strategies and tools related to budget preparation and management. As has been the case in most previous courses, this was discussed as a weakness of the existing EPPE course. The trainers shared that


CIDEIM is currently working on a finance planning and management module, which will be shared with UWI once a draft has been finalized.

• Participants identified some elements of the EPPE materials that should be revised/updated:

o There was much discussion about the relation between the project goal and the “why” in the project statement. Perhaps more examples could be included which show the different levels in which the potential impact of a particular project can be understood.

o One idea mentioned was that it would be useful to encourage participants to connect their projects to current global health issues in the development of project statements and, most importantly, project goals.

o The KEP antibodies example should be reviewed to ensure that it is consistent throughout with the methodology

o The manual and Step-by-Step Guide should be updated to include examples of and guidelines for tables presenting the project team, communications framework and reporting strategy (potential examples included in Appendix D)

o The Step-by-Step guide should be updated to reflect the 2007 versions of MS Project and PowerPoint.

9. Identification of potential new trainers The following participants expressed their interest in becoming EPPE trainers: 1. Colette Cunningham-Myrie 2. Erika Ellis 3. Damion Francis 4. Georgiana Gordon-Strachan 5. Shelly McFarlane 6. Marshall Tulloch-Reid 7. Cassandra Wint


10. Appendices Appendix A: Analysis of participant evaluation questionnaires (1 single file) Appendix B: Trainer evaluation questionnaire format (1 single file) Appendix C: Project documentation developed at the end of the course (1 single file) Appendix D: Potential examples to be used for Module 5



ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This course has been developed by TDR with the aim to be integrated and disseminated to academic research institutions in developing countries and by developing countries. In order to transfer ownership to institutions in developing countries and ensure a sustainable capacity development locally, TDR welcomes the commitment of these institutions and the support of additional partners. TDR would like to thank CIDEIM for their stimulating enthusiasm and high commitment and for their professionalism and innovative ideas in their approach to integrate the course. TDR would also like to thank the Fogarty International Centre and Yale University who have been showing a strong support to the dissemination of the course in developing countries and have co-sponsored the course at CIDEIM. Many thanks also go to the organizers and the participants who made this course an enjoyable and successful experience. Muchas Gracias!

Documents

Course Report Jamaica Nov 2009