There have been four CANP Workshops spanning 6 years.
ICMI has been spending a lot of money funding the CANP project. The initial conception had an evaluative component built into each CANP that has really not happened in any formal way. Is it cost effective? What else, or what differently, could we do?
Our experience so far has shown us that the different regions have responded differently to the CANP opportunity, and that individuals make a huge difference one way or the other.
ICMI EC is receiving legitimate calls for funding for follow-up activities from each CANP and needs to decide on a sensible, adequate and sustainable response. With limited resources and other eligible regions, we need to decide how best to spend the available money to both ensure the money already spent has maximum effect, but also to meet global responsibilities.
How best can the aims of CANP be met?
CANP Review Proposal
A proposal to review CANP has been presented to the ICMI EC and been accepted at the EC meeting in Macao in June 2015.
It was proposed to review of CANP as a whole (rather than individual evaluations of each CANP) for which a Review Committee should be established. The committee members are Michèle Artigue and Bill Barton (as the originators and CANP Managers of the programmes in Mali and Cambodia), Angel Ruiz (as one of the CANP ICMI Liaisons), Ferdinando Arzarello (as ICMI President as well as being a CANP ICMI Liaison), and Lena Koch (for her knowledge of all five CANPs, her international development experience, and her financial management experience). Additionally Abraham Arcavi as ICMI SG is invited as ex-officio of the Review Committee.
The following Terms of Reference were proposed:
· Evaluate the whole CANP programme for how well it meets the original aims and its other impacts.
· Evaluate the whole CANP programme for value for money and financial efficiency and sustainability.
· Review and update the aims, description and criteria documents for CANP.
· Make recommendations on how existing CANPs are further supported.
· Make recommendations on new CANPs, or other CANP activities.
Lena Koch is coordinating the process of the CANP review.
As a first step during January and June 2016 the participants, organizers and IPC member answered two online surveys regarding their CANP experiences.
The survey for participants (CANP 1-4) can be found here.
The survey for CANP 5 (participants) can be found here.
The survey for organizers and IPC members can be found here.
The first results of the surveys were presented at the EC meeting in Berlin in July 2016. The presentation can be found here.
In July 2016 an ICME13 discussion group had two fruitful meetings regarding CANP and its future.