Written by Mekong Institute
For the first time the Mekong Institute designed and organised a training course on “Project Management for Sustainable Development in the GMS” with financial assistance of NZAID. The course was held from the 10th of February to the 7th of March at the Mekong Institute on the campus of the Khon Kaen University and was attended by 34 participants from the six GMS countries, Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, Thailand, Vietnam and the Yunnan Province of China.
The response from the GMScountries showed that the selection of the course subject was te right choice. The eficient implementation of projects requires competent project personnel and with the increasing number of projects in the GMS countries through various donor agencies the need for better trained project personnel is urgently felt.
The effiicient planning and implementation of projects plays an important role in the economic and social development of the GMS countries and thus contributing substantially to the reduction of poverty.
The course consisted of four training modules and additional English language training.
Module 1: Project Cycle and Project Planning
Module 2: Project Team Buildng and Management
Module 3: Project Budget Management
Module 4: Project Monitoring and Evaluation and Project Rist Management
NZAID policies on gender and development (GAD), enviornment and educaton were incorporated into the course modules and also addressed throughout the course. Of the 34 participants on this course 12 were women.
From the course evaluaton it can be concluded that the four course objectives were widely achieved. The majority of participants considered that from the course they gained “a lot” of knowledge and skills for dealing more effectively with project management issues, developed skills for learning, computer use, and interent searching, built a spirit of cooperation and established professional and personal contacts among themselves.
The course achieved a high level of satisfaction by the participants. Of te 34 participants, 18 were “very satisfied” with the course, 15 were “satisfied” and one participant did not answer the questions.
This course evaluation report presents and analyses course design and delivery, course services and course results, using data and information collected from participants and presenters coupled with those from other complementary sources. It also contains comparisons with some indicators on previous courses.
This report includes recommendations, again largely from presenters. Some of tem were addressed when the course was on going. They will be useful and have significant implication for future course at MI and even courses on such theme/ topics elsewhere.
