Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Value of PC

Expand Messages
  • Deepa Ramesh
    I read the posts on the value/relevance/effectiveness of Peace Corps in today s world (beyond the personal benefit to the PCV), and I m feeling the need to
    Message 1 of 6 , Oct 9, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      I read the posts on the value/relevance/effectiveness of Peace Corps in today's world (beyond the personal benefit to the PCV), and I'm feeling the need to chime in.  First and foremost, it really varies by country and by program, and unfortunately much of it comes down to a cult of personality(ies), mainly Country Director and APCDs, but also training staff and folks in Washington.
       
      As both an RPCV and a former APCD, I've seen really strong Peace Corps programs and I've seen some pretty loose ones.  So much depends on the Country Director *especially*, the program/project design and how well it's run.  With a well-developed and run program (i.e., focused objectives developed with input and buy-in from all stakeholders, adequately trained and closely supervised AND supported Volunteers), Volunteers truly are small-scale development workers, helping to move the country in the direction it wants to go.  No, it's not just a pie-in-the-sky ideal.  I've seen it in action, and it's impressive.  The process has a lot of integrity, and it produces results.  But it requires strong and focused leadership, not just for programming and training, but also when it comes to establishing, communicating and enforcing PC policies (e.g., time out of site, alcohol, drugs, etc.), and all PC staff--including admin and medical--have to be rowing in the same direction.  In a tightly-run program, Volunteers are a professional cadre of workers, take a great deal of pride in what they do and what they represent, and local and national officials appreciate the assistance and perspective they bring to their communities.  Moreover, PCVs end up with a deep respect and appreciation for PC staff and vice versa (equally important).
       
      Once you've seen how good a PC program can be, it's maddening to see how weak one can be.


      Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.
    • John Patten
      Fair enough, but I would challenge this statement:   ...helping to move the country in the direction it wants to go. The process...produces results.    The
      Message 2 of 6 , Oct 9, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Fair enough, but I would challenge this statement:
         
        ...helping to move the country in the direction it wants to go. The process...produces results. 
         
        The only way for that claim to be valid is through measures of effectiveness, rather than inputs and outputs. We may have measured a program, but not its effects on where a country thinks it wants to go, which is often unclear. It is ultimately the country itself that decides if they want to be rich or not through their policies to promote that through all levels of governance and line ministries.
         
        A patchwork quilt of good projects may help individuals, build endearing relationships and be appreciated, but not to economies of scale. We have been in some of these contexts for 40-plus years and there is very current and valid critique of foreign aid not passing the so-what test. If we cannot identify what the objectives are in any meaningful sense other than in an idealistic way of making the world a better place, then any program or intervention cannot address that.

        <deeparamesh@...> wrote:

        From: Deepa Ramesh <deeparamesh@...>
        Subject: [ujeni] Value of PC
        To: "Ujeni" <ujeni@yahoogroups.com>
        Date: Friday, October 9, 2009, 5:11 AM

         
        I read the posts on the value/relevance/ effectiveness of Peace Corps in today's world (beyond the personal benefit to the PCV), and I'm feeling the need to chime in.  First and foremost, it really varies by country and by program, and unfortunately much of it comes down to a cult of personality( ies), mainly Country Director and APCDs, but also training staff and folks in Washington.
         
        As both an RPCV and a former APCD, I've seen really strong Peace Corps programs and I've seen some pretty loose ones.  So much depends on the Country Director *especially* , the program/project design and how well it's run.  With a well-developed and run program (i.e., focused objectives developed with input and buy-in from all stakeholders, adequately trained and closely supervised AND supported Volunteers), Volunteers truly are small-scale development workers, helping to move the country in the direction it wants to go.  No, it's not just a pie-in-the-sky ideal.  I've seen it in action, and it's impressive.  The process has a lot of integrity, and it produces results.  But it requires strong and focused leadership, not just for programming and training, but also when it comes to establishing, communicating and enforcing PC policies (e.g., time out of site, alcohol, drugs, etc.), and all PC staff--including admin and medical--have to be rowing in the same direction.  In a tightly-run program, Volunteers are a professional cadre of workers, take a great deal of pride in what they do and what they represent, and local and national officials appreciate the assistance and perspective they bring to their communities.  Moreover, PCVs end up with a deep respect and appreciation for PC staff and vice versa (equally important).
         
        Once you've seen how good a PC program can be, it's maddening to see how weak one can be.


        Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.
      • Deepa Ramesh
        John, I totally agree that any indicators have to be concrete, specific and measurable, not just broad-scale and feel good (seems like you re thinking along
        Message 3 of 6 , Oct 10, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          John,
           
          I totally agree that any indicators have to be concrete, specific and measurable, not just broad-scale and feel good (seems like you're thinking along the lines of PC's 3 goals).  I think you work in development, so you know exactly what I'm talking about.  There's no reason Peace Corps should be held to a lower standard than any other development agency--USAID, NGOs, etc.  Along those lines, I disagree with:
           
          "We may have measured a program, but not its effects on where a country thinks it wants to go, which is often unclear."
           
          I don't think that's necessarily true--it depends on the country.  A strong program does measure impact.  If you have active participation from the host country government (which every well-designed program should, almost by definition), then the project objectives are specific and move in the same direction of the country's sector-specific goals, whether that's environment, youth development, education, etc.  A lot of time and energy has to be spent developing robust measurement tools, and it has to be done with participation and support from the host country counterpart agency.  This is no different than how a good NGO project operates, with the exception that PC needs to (and in general tends to) have much closer involvement with host country governments--sometimes at the national level and sometimes at a regional level.  The result of a "patchwork quilt of good projects [that] may help individuals, build endearing relationships" only happens when the PC office and host country agencies aren't doing their job of harmonizing all these individual, grassroots efforts and ensuring that they're all contributing to a larger goal/vision.  If you haven't seen a well-designed and run PC program, I would encourage you to visit one--they're inspiring!  (To me, a good litmus test is if the PCVs can explain to you the broader goals of their sector--both PC's and the host country's--and how their particular project ties into that.)
           
          On a broad scale, PC can never, and should never, have specific goals on a global level, b/c it's very strength is that it doesn't take a cookie-cutter approach to development.  Every program is tailor-made to suit the needs of the host country.  That's PC's comparative advantage over other development agencies--it is not donor-driven development, nor are the strategies and priorities dictated by Washington.
           
          My two (or ten) cents.
           
          BTW, where are you now, and what are you up to?
           
          Deepa
           

          Re: Value of PC

          Posted by: "John Patten" jppatten98@...   jppatten98

          Fri Oct 9, 2009 7:41 am (PDT)



          Fair enough, but I would challenge this statement:
           
          ...helping to move the country in the direction it wants to go. The process...produces results. 
           
          The only way for that claim to be valid is through measures of effectiveness, rather than inputs and outputs. We may have measured a program, but not its effects on where a country thinks it wants to go, which is often unclear. It is ultimately the country itself that decides if they want to be rich or not through their policies to promote that through all levels of governance and line ministries.
           
          A patchwork quilt of good projects may help individuals, build endearing relationships and be appreciated, but not to economies of scale. We have been in some of these contexts for 40-plus years and there is very current and valid critique of foreign aid not passing the so-what test. If we cannot identify what the objectives are in any meaningful sense other than in an idealistic way of making the world a better place, then any program or intervention cannot address that.

          <deeparamesh@ hotmail.com> wrote:

          From: Deepa Ramesh <deeparamesh@ hotmail.com>
          Subject: [ujeni] Value of PC
          To: "Ujeni" <ujeni@yahoogroups. com>
          Date: Friday, October 9, 2009, 5:11 AM

           

          I read the posts on the value/relevance/ effectiveness of Peace Corps in today's world (beyond the personal benefit to the PCV), and I'm feeling the need to chime in.  First and foremost, it really varies by country and by program, and unfortunately much of it comes down to a cult of personality( ies), mainly Country Director and APCDs, but also training staff and folks in Washington.
           
          As both an RPCV and a former APCD, I've seen really strong Peace Corps programs and I've seen some pretty loose ones.  So much depends on the Country Director *especially* , the program/project design and how well it's run.  With a well-developed and run program (i.e., focused objectives developed with input and buy-in from all stakeholders,  adequately trained and closely supervised AND supported Volunteers), Volunteers truly are small-scale development workers, helping to move the country in the direction it wants to go.  No, it's not just a pie-in-the-sky ideal.  I've seen it in action, and it's impressive.  The process has a lot of integrity, and it produces results.  But it requires strong and focused leadership, not just for programming and training, but also when it comes to establishing, communicating and enforcing PC policies (e.g., time out of site, alcohol, drugs, etc.), and all PC staff--including admin and medical--have to be
          rowing in the same direction.  In a tightly-run program, Volunteers are a professional cadre of workers, take a great deal of pride in what they do and what they represent, and local and national officials appreciate the assistance and perspective they bring to their communities.   Moreover,  PCVs end up with a deep respect and appreciation for PC staff and vice versa (equally important).
           
          Once you've seen how good a PC program can be, it's maddening to see how weak one can be.


          Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free. Sign up now.
        • John Patten
          Deepa, thanks for the good feedback. Would love to chat sometime. I m quite sure I do not have all the answers (even in my own house!)   ...   JP ... From:
          Message 4 of 6 , Oct 10, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Deepa, thanks for the good feedback. Would love to chat sometime. I'm quite sure I do not have all the answers (even in my own house!)
             
            :)
             
            JP

            --- On Sat, 10/10/09, Deepa Ramesh <deeparamesh@...> wrote:

            From: Deepa Ramesh <deeparamesh@...>
            Subject: [ujeni] RE: Value of PC
            To: "Ujeni" <ujeni@yahoogroups.com>
            Date: Saturday, October 10, 2009, 9:11 AM

             
            John,
             
            I totally agree that any indicators have to be concrete, specific and measurable, not just broad-scale and feel good (seems like you're thinking along the lines of PC's 3 goals).  I think you work in development, so you know exactly what I'm talking about.  There's no reason Peace Corps should be held to a lower standard than any other development agency--USAID, NGOs, etc.  Along those lines, I disagree with:
             
            "We may have measured a program, but not its effects on where a country thinks it wants to go, which is often unclear."
             
            I don't think that's necessarily true--it depends on the country.  A strong program does measure impact.  If you have active participation from the host country government (which every well-designed program should, almost by definition), then the project objectives are specific and move in the same direction of the country's sector-specific goals, whether that's environment, youth development, education, etc.  A lot of time and energy has to be spent developing robust measurement tools, and it has to be done with participation and support from the host country counterpart agency.  This is no different than how a good NGO project operates, with the exception that PC needs to (and in general tends to) have much closer involvement with host country governments- -sometimes at the national level and sometimes at a regional level.  The result of a "patchwork quilt of good projects [that] may help individuals, build endearing relationships" only happens when the PC office and host country agencies aren't doing their job of harmonizing all these individual, grassroots efforts and ensuring that they're all contributing to a larger goal/vision.  If you haven't seen a well-designed and run PC program, I would encourage you to visit one--they're inspiring!  (To me, a good litmus test is if the PCVs can explain to you the broader goals of their sector--both PC's and the host country's--and how their particular project ties into that.)
             
            On a broad scale, PC can never, and should never, have specific goals on a global level, b/c it's very strength is that it doesn't take a cookie-cutter approach to development.  Every program is tailor-made to suit the needs of the host country.  That's PC's comparative advantage over other development agencies--it is not donor-driven development, nor are the strategies and priorities dictated by Washington.
             
            My two (or ten) cents.
             
            BTW, where are you now, and what are you up to?
             
            Deepa
             

            Re: Value of PC

            Posted by: "John Patten" jppatten98@yahoo. com   jppatten98

            Fri Oct 9, 2009 7:41 am (PDT)



            Fair enough, but I would challenge this statement:
             
            ...helping to move the country in the direction it wants to go. The process...produces results. 
             
            The only way for that claim to be valid is through measures of effectiveness, rather than inputs and outputs. We may have measured a program, but not its effects on where a country thinks it wants to go, which is often unclear. It is ultimately the country itself that decides if they want to be rich or not through their policies to promote that through all levels of governance and line ministries.
             
            A patchwork quilt of good projects may help individuals, build endearing relationships and be appreciated, but not to economies of scale. We have been in some of these contexts for 40-plus years and there is very current and valid critique of foreign aid not passing the so-what test. If we cannot identify what the objectives are in any meaningful sense other than in an idealistic way of making the world a better place, then any program or intervention cannot address that.

            <deeparamesh@ hotmail.com> wrote:

            From: Deepa Ramesh <deeparamesh@ hotmail.com>
            Subject: [ujeni] Value of PC
            To: "Ujeni" <ujeni@yahoogroups. com>
            Date: Friday, October 9, 2009, 5:11 AM

             

            I read the posts on the value/relevance/ effectiveness of Peace Corps in today's world (beyond the personal benefit to the PCV), and I'm feeling the need to chime in.  First and foremost, it really varies by country and by program, and unfortunately much of it comes down to a cult of personality( ies), mainly Country Director and APCDs, but also training staff and folks in Washington.
             
            As both an RPCV and a former APCD, I've seen really strong Peace Corps programs and I've seen some pretty loose ones.  So much depends on the Country Director *especially* , the program/project design and how well it's run.  With a well-developed and run program (i.e., focused objectives developed with input and buy-in from all stakeholders,  adequately trained and closely supervised AND supported Volunteers), Volunteers truly are small-scale development workers, helping to move the country in the direction it wants to go.  No, it's not just a pie-in-the-sky ideal.  I've seen it in action, and it's impressive.  The process has a lot of integrity, and it produces results.  But it requires strong and focused leadership, not just for programming and training, but also when it comes to establishing, communicating and enforcing PC policies (e.g., time out of site, alcohol, drugs, etc.), and all PC staff--including admin and medical--have to be
            rowing in the same direction.  In a tightly-run program, Volunteers are a professional cadre of workers, take a great deal of pride in what they do and what they represent, and local and national officials appreciate the assistance and perspective they bring to their communities.   Moreover,  PCVs end up with a deep respect and appreciation for PC staff and vice versa (equally important).
             
            Once you've seen how good a PC program can be, it's maddening to see how weak one can be.


            Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free. Sign up now.
          • Paul DEVER
            Haniko confirmed that you don t have all the answers in yojur house...but she does want the remote back, and said that Uncle Pingu will get very mad if you
            Message 5 of 6 , Oct 11, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              Haniko confirmed that you don't have all the answers in yojur house...but she does want the remote back, and said that Uncle Pingu will get very mad if you don't trturn it...
               


              To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com
              From: jppatten98@...
              Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:28:22 -0700
              Subject: Re: [ujeni] RE: Value of PC
               
              Deepa, thanks for the good feedback. Would love to chat sometime. I'm quite sure I do not have all the answers (even in my own house!)

               
              :)
               
              JP
               


              Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.
            • Paul DEVER
              The dever brood is passing thru. Anyone wanna get together? To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com From: pcpaul@hotmail.com Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 01:20:32 +0000 Subject:
              Message 6 of 6 , Oct 12, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                The dever brood is passing thru. Anyone wanna get together?


                To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com
                From: pcpaul@...
                Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 01:20:32 +0000
                Subject: RE: [ujeni] RE: Value of PC

                 
                Haniko confirmed that you don't have all the answers in yojur house...but she does want the remote back, and said that Uncle Pingu will get very mad if you don't trturn it...
                 


                To: ujeni@yahoogroups. com
                From: jppatten98@yahoo. com
                Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:28:22 -0700
                Subject: Re: [ujeni] RE: Value of PC
                 
                Deepa, thanks for the good feedback. Would love to chat sometime. I'm quite sure I do not have all the answers (even in my own house!)

                 
                :)
                 
                JP
                 


                Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.


                Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. Get it now.
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.