Deliverable 2 6 - Pilot Assessment Report_Final

DESIGN AND PILOT OF A PARENTING PROGRAMME
TO IMPROVE DEVELOPMENTAL OUTCOMES FOR DISADVANTAGED
CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS IN TIMOR-LESTE – PHASE II
PILOT ASSESSMENT REPORT
10 May 2016

Page ii
Table of Contents
List of Figures............................................................................................................................iii
List of Tables.............................................................................................................................iii
Abbreviations Used..................................................................................................................iv
I. Introduction.........................................................................................................................1
II. Parenting Programme Vision.............................................................................................2
A. Parenting Programme Design..............................................................................................................................5
III. Description of Pilot Activities...........................................................................................7
A. TOT for Trainer-Mentors.......................................................................................................................................9
B. Induction Training in Municipalities ..............................................................................................................10
1. Railaco,Ermera....................................................................................................................................................11
2. Uatolari, Viqueque...............................................................................................................................................12
C. Parenting Education Sessions at the Community Level .........................................................................13
IV. Results from Pilot Activities...........................................................................................14
A. TOT for Trainer-Mentors.....................................................................................................................................14
B. Induction Training in Municipalities ..............................................................................................................16
C. Suggested Improvements in TOT and Induction Training Activities................................................17
D. Parenting Education Sessions at the Community Level.........................................................................19
V. Suggested Next Steps ......................................................................................................23
1. Nationaland sub-national coordination and planning........................................................................23
2. Training...................................................................................................................................................................24
3. Launch activities..................................................................................................................................................25
4. Media, communications and IEC materials...............................................................................................26
5. Local level implementation..............................................................................................................................26
6. Monitoring and Evaluation..............................................................................................................................27
VI. Pilot Assessment Issues and Recommendations...........................................................29
VII. Costing............................................................................................................................39
VIII. Contact Persons............................................................................................................41
Annex I: Agenda for Training of Trainers (TOT).....................................................................45
Annex II: Agenda for Induction Training................................................................................49
Annex III: M&E Tools..............................................................................................................51

Page iii
List of Figures
FIGURE 1: REINFORCEMENT OF KEY MESSAGES ........................................................................................................................4
FIGURE 2: PROPOSED DESIGNOF PARENTING PROGRAMME.....................................................................................................5
FIGURE 3: TRAINING PROGRAMME STRUCTURE ........................................................................................................................8
FIGURE 4: PILOT TRAINING ROLL OUT......................................................................................................................................9
FIGURE 5: ROLES AND POSITIONSOF INDUCTIONTRAINING PARTICIPANTS, RAILACO, ERMERA......................................... 11
FIGURE 6: ROLES AND POSITIONSOF INDUCTIONTRAINING PARTICIPANTS, UATOLARI, VIQUEQUE.................................... 12
List of Tables
TABLE 1: PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE INTRAINING AND FACILITATIONAMONGST INDUCTIONTRAINING PARTICIPANTS........ 10
TABLE 2: CHARACTERISTICSOF INDUCTIONTRAINING PARTICIPANTS.................................................................................. 10
TABLE 3: REPRESENTATIONOF INDUCTIONTRAINING PARTICIPANTSBY SUCO INRAILACO, ERMERA................................ 12
TABLE 4: REPRESENTATIONOF INDUCTIONTRAINING PARTICIPANTSBY SUCO – UATOLARI, VIQUEQUE............................ 13
TABLE 5: PARENTING EDUCATIONSESSIONSHELD INERMERA.............................................................................................. 13
TABLE 6: PARENTING EDUCATIONSESSIONSHELD INVIQUEQUE........................................................................................... 14
TABLE 7: CONTACT PERSONS FOR ROLL OUT OF ACTIVITIESINRAILACO, ERMERA............................................................. 41
TABLE 8: CONTACT PERSONSFOR ROLL OUT OF ACTIVITIESINRAILACO, ERMERA.............................................................. 42

Page iv
Abbreviations Used
BdM Bolsa da Mãe
C4D Communication for Development
DNDS National Directorate for Social Development (of MSS)
IEC Information, Education and Communication
INGO International Non-governmental Organisation
KAP Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MI Ministry of the Interior
MSS Ministry of Social Solidarity
MuN Municipality
NGO Non-governmental Organisation
OPMT Organizasaun Popular da Mulher de Timor
PESCL Parenting EducationSessions at the Community Level
PSA Public Service Announcement
SA Social Animator
SSW Social Support Worker
SECOMS Secretariat of State for Communications
TOR Terms of Reference
TOT Training-of-Trainers

I. Introduction
Timor-Leste based NGO Ba Futuru, in collaboration with Rain Barrel Communications,
an international consulting firm, was contracted by UNICEF Timor-Leste to provide
technical assistance to design and pilot a parenting programme to improve
developmental outcomes for children and youth in Timor-Leste. The work built on the
initial design phase conducted in 2014 that included the development of a framework
for caregiver education and support, based on a mapping of existing parenting
programmes and a needs assessment of caregivers.1
This Phase II design and pilot project took place from June 2015 to May 2016. The key
tasks included:
 designing and finalising a parenting programme;
 supporting the pilot of quarterly parenting education sessions at the community
level;
 a baseline survey of knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP) conducted in
2015;
 supporting information, education and communication (IEC) material;
 design of a follow-up support framework, including home visits and peer
support groups;
 a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework.
The findings of the KAP survey informed the design of the parenting programme
including the parenting education sessions, the supporting IEC material, suggested
communication activities and the follow-up support framework. The programme
promotes a Communication for Development (C4D) approach and is supported by a
robust M&E framework to ensure changes in parenting practices can be monitored,
measured and attributed to the programme intervention.
This report explains the overall vision and approach for the parenting programme,
describes the pilot activities in the two municipalities and presents the strengths and
areas for improvement in the training and delivery of the parenting education sessions.
Based on the pilot, this report outlines recommendations for the roll out and scale up of
the parenting education sessions along with next steps. Projected costings are included
in an accompanying spreadsheet.
“As a community leader of the suco, I appreciate the information with the theme
Strengthening Families (‘Hametin Familia’). It has information that is incredibly wonderful
1 Shah, R. (2014). A frameworkfor caregiver education and support in Timor-Leste:An analysis of existing programs,
caregiver needs and suggestions for ways forward. Prepared for UNICEF Timor-Leste and the Ministry for Social
Solidarity, Timor-Leste.

about how parents can work together to look after the development of their children, and
how parents can work hard to take care of their children’s dail y needs, not only with
money or things, but love is what is really important.”
Cristalina Quintão, 40, Chefe Suco Railaco Leten
Participant of Parenting Education Session
II. Parenting Programme Vision
This parenting programme aims to empower and generate behaviour change amongst
parents and caregivers to support improved developmental outcomes for
disadvantaged children in Timor-Leste. The programme was developed as a result of
combining analysis of the situation in Timor-Leste, including the cultural context, and
Government goals and international best practice.
The Situation Analysis of Children in Timor-Leste (2014) highlights several challenges
faced by children. These include undernourishment; low preschool enrolment and
school retention; high prevalence of violence against children; teenage pregnancy and
child marriage, and widespread exposure to alcohol and substance abuse. A key aspect
of improving developmental outcomes for vulnerable children and adolescents,
especially in relation to early childhood development, is engaging with parents and
other caregivers who are primarily responsible for their growth and personal
development.2 This is critical in Timor-Leste, where the average woman bears five or
more children3 and close to 43 per cent of the population is younger than 15 years old.4
Britto and Engle’s (2013) comprehensive review states: “…the multi-disciplinary and
international literature on parenting clearly indicates that parents are one of the most
influential factors in children’s development.” However, parents and caregivers of high-
risk families in Timor-Leste face a myriad of challenges. They need better
understanding of early childhood development and their critical role during this phase
of life; reinforcement of positive behaviours they already use; and information and skills
to support new behaviours to meet the holistic needs of their children. The ten key
focus areas are the following:
1. General Parenting: Every child needs unconditional love, verbal and
physical affection, emotional security and sensitivity to his or her needs and
feelings.
2 Britto, P.R., & Engle, P. (2013, unpublished). Parenting education and support: Maximizing the most critical enabling
environment. New York: UNICEF.
3 “FertilityRate;Total Births per Woman inTimor-Leste (2012). “http://www.tradingeconomics.com/timor-leste/fertility-
rate-total-births-per-woman-wb-data.html [4 April 2013].
4 United Nations Development Programme 2011, Timor-Leste Human Development Report 2011: Managing Natural
Resources for Human Development.

2. Early Stimulation: Interact with your child in utero and from the time they
are born through games and play, songs, rhymes, stories and reading.
3. Child Protection: Ensure children are cared for and supervised by an adult or
a child older than 10 years old and protect your child from physical violence
and all forms of abuse.
4. Alternative Discipline: Use positive discipline approaches with your child to
resolve conflict or redirect misbehaviour.
5. Nutrition: Feed your young child (from 6 -23 months) daily nutritious foods
such as egg, liver, chicken, meat, mung bean or kidney beans.
6. Hygiene: Wash your hands with soap and water at important times such as
before eating, before feeding young children, before cooking, after using the
toilet, after cleaning baby’s bottom and after touching dirty things. Stop
defecating in the open.
7. Birth Registration: Register your child immediately after birth.
8. Danger Signs and Care Seeking: Take your child immediately to a health
facility if they are showing signs of serious illness.
9. Education for All: Send your child to school from an early age, keep involved
in your child’s learning and provide support with their homework.
10.Youth Issues: Talk to your adolescent children about issues related to bodily
changes and sex and sexuality in order to prepare them for the future.
International best practice shows that new knowledge is better processed through
dialogue, or two-way communication (so that people can talk about it and consider how
it relates to daily life), and that key messages are best delivered through multiple
channels so the same information is received in various ways.
The Ministry of Social Solidarity (MSS) has identified parenting education and support
as a promising modality to mitigate these challenges, with a newly-articulated theory of
change that envisions positive behaviour change amongst parents and caregivers in
vulnerable households.
Given these factors, the Parenting Programme is a holistic, integrated and nationally-
delivered programme working at three levels, including a communication campaign at
the national level, parenting education sessions at the community level, and follow-up
home visits and peer-to-peer support interventions. The Parenting Programme
approach combines delivery of new information and skills with generating dialogue
(two-way communication) to enable community-based problem solving and
community-led, local solutions. This approach aims to enable parents to: a) understand
their critical role in their children’s development; b) build on the things they currently
do that enhance this development; c) learn new information and skills; d) practice new
approaches with community outreach workers; e) solve common parenting problems
and create locally relevant solutions, and f) be supported in adopting new techniques
and behaviours that will improve developmental outcomes for children.

This is a multi-disciplinary approach where specialists from various areas (i.e., health,
education, protection, WASH, nutrition and agriculture) work together at the
community level on the same key messaging, with reinforcement by a local-to-mid-level
communication campaign and follow-up support via existing aldeia-level networks. A
‘Family Support Team’ at the suco level supports a total of 10 key behaviour impact
messages that show the importance and inter-relatedness of all sectors in achieving
improved development outcomes for the most disadvantaged children in Timor-Leste.
The proposed approach, driven by Communication for Development (C4D) principles
and best practices, provides parents and caregivers with new information and skills
through quarterly parenting education sessions at community level, which also
provides a platform for parents to discuss and come up with local solutions. These
sessions should be led by a community-based team comprised of respected and
effective community workers. Each team decides how to deliver each message and
organize the parenting education sessions at community level once every three months.
They also determine the best ways to promote the key messages through various
channels in their community, such as the local health post, preschool and other
education facilities, faith-based activities and any private groups (i.e., led by local non-
governmental organisations [NGOs], international non-governmental organisations
[INGOs] and development partners). A national to mid and local-level media
communication campaign should be used to reinforce messaging through a weekly
radio show, listening groups, guided theatre for young people, billboards, posters and
word-of-mouth communication.
Figure 1: ReinforcementofKey Messages
Suku Family
SupportTeam
Suku-level
Community
Sessions
(every 3
months)
Aldeia-level
Follow-up
Support
(monthly)
Media
Campaign
Reinforcement
Key
Message

A. Parenting Programme Design
Figure 2: ProposedDesign ofParenting Programme
Municipal Level
Programme Focal Point
(reporting, link to national level & admin post)
Administrative Post Level
Social Support Worker/ + Trainer-Mentor
Social Animator (new)
(coordination, outreach) (support suco-level teams)
Suco Level
Family Support Team (Grupu Hametin Família)
(quarterly delivery of parenting education sessions at community level,
determines integrated delivery of key messages within suco)
Aldeia Level
Home Visits + Peer Groups
(follow-up support for parents & caregivers, emphasis on vulnerable
families and parents of children with special needs)
Family Level
Positive changes for children's holistic development
across 10 key areas

The programme design incorporates scalability and national-level roll out as part of
long-term implementation planning. However it can easily be piloted in one or two
municipalities for evaluation and adjustment of the design prior to scaling up.
Under the proposed design, the programme would utilise existing government
structures for coordination, implementation and monitoring of activities. Government
partners would include the Ministry of Health, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Justice
as well as the Secretariat of State for Youth and Sports and the Secretariat of State for
Communications. It would also utilise an administrative hierarchy with five levels --
National, Municipal, Administrative Post, Suco and Aldeia. Figure 2 demonstrates the
key actors at each of these levels, briefly outlining roles and responsibilities.
Municipal Level Programme Focal Point – This person can be responsible for
reporting and linking to the national level. They can receive and distribute new
material throughout each municipality, allowing for adaptations to programme modules
in response to programme evaluation and emerging priority issues. Additionally, other
communication campaign materials, such as a radio serial and youth theatre
guidebooks, and potentially public service announcements (PSAs), will be made
available for further promotion of key messages within the target municipalities. This
will enable each municipality to respond to their specific context, utilizing and
strengthening connections with community radio outlets, youth centres and schools,
and best placement of banners, posters and other print media.
Administrative Post Level – At this level, a partnership should be formed between the
MSS staff placed at administrative post level (Apoiu Tekniku Sosiál, or Social Support
Worker [SSW], and/or Animador Sosiál, or Social Animator [SA]) and a newly-
designated Parenting Programme Trainer-Mentor. While the initial design had only one
person at the administrative post level, feedback, consultations and piloting pointed to
the need for each administrative post to have two people to work together for
programme training, coordination and support as per above. The Social Support
Workers have a high level of knowledge and well-established relationships with local
leadership throughout their post; they are good organisers and have substantial
experience in working with vulnerable families and making referrals for services.
However, they generally lack adequate facilitation skills and as such another person
should be identified from each administrative post to become a trainer-mentor. These
two positions should work together to mobilize and train Family Support Teams at the
suco level. Specific issues about selecting the trainer-mentors and compensation are
discussed in the Next Steps and Recommendations sections of this report.
Suco Level: A Family Support Team would then be built in each suco, comprised of five
to 12 local leaders and key influencers who are already successfully engaged with their
local communities. These could include members of the suco council, health
professionals, teachers, members of the clergy, youth leaders, and others. Selected

members of this team can receive initial training on the parenting programme package
and guiding principles. After this, the family support teams will be responsible for:
a) Determining how each key message should be best promoted in their suco,
adapting to local language and education level;
b) Organizing and delivering the parenting education session at community level
with parents and caregivers on that quarter’s key message;
c) Coordinating follow-up support for the most vulnerable parents and caregivers
through aldeia-level peer support groups (utilizing existing groups and networks
wherever possible) and home visits, as needed;
d) Being supportive of communication campaign messaging, and
e) Reporting on activities to their trainer-mentor, ideally monthly.
Aldeia Level: Follow-up activities for vulnerable households (i.e., families with children
with disabilities, adolescent parents, and others as identified as needing additional
support) should be carried out at the aldeia level by members of the Family Support
Team. The home visits and peer support groups should provide opportunities to
reinforce key messages, promoted through formal and word-of-mouth communication.
Family Level: Behaviour change amongst parents and caregivers of children will lead
to positive changes in children’s holistic development across the 10 key areas.
III. Description of Pilot Activities
The purpose of the pilot training activities was to train suco-level leaders to be able to
effectively conduct parenting education sessions at the community level. This strategy
was intended to promote appropriate localisation of materials, relevance of content,
and buy-in from local leaders who would either be leading the sessions or have a voice
in the process through their interaction with the chosen mentors.
UNICEF and Ba Futuru visited Ermera and Viqueque for on-the-ground coordination
and consultations with local stakeholders. The purpose of these visits was: a) to share
the programme concept widely with stakeholders and promote pilot activities; b) to
identify TOT participants (i.e., one participant from each administrative post in addition
to the MSS Social Support Workers/Social Animators), and c) to coordinate with suco-
level leadership to select induction training participants.
Village chiefs (Xefi Suco) were tasked to share information about the programme and
upcoming pilot within their villages. This also included forming a Family Support Team
(Grupu Hametin Família), and identifying Family Support Team members who could
attend an induction training to be held at the administrative post offices.
Ba Futuru facilitators undertook extensive preparations for the training, which included
group and individual review of training materials and role play sessions on TOT

modules, as well as group feedback sessions. Materials were pre-tested with parents of
young children, focusing on the flipchart images, key messages and other IEC materials
that were developed. Ba Futuru facilitators maintained and increased communication
with local counterparts between the initial coordination visits and the induction
training. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) tools were also developed and translated in
close collaboration with the Rain Barrel Communications team, and with input and
feedback from UNICEF.
Figure 3: Training Programme Structure
Three levels of training were conducted for the pilot, as described in figure 3. These
included training of trainers, induction training, and parenting education sessions. The
rationale for the three-tiered structure was to train a core group of trainer-mentors
who would then provide training and follow-up support to community level facilitators.
The pilot activities focused on the parenting education sessions themselves and did not
include home visits and peer support group modalities due to limitations in scope and
timeframe of the pilot, per UNICEF Terms of Reference (TOR) for the assignment.
However, the three-tiered model will facilitate scaling up as the parenting programme is
rolled out in different municipalities. The programme will include follow-up support
and link in with media communication materials such as radio and theatre.
The pilot training roll out is pictured in Figure 4.
1. Training of Trainers
(Trainer-Mentors trained at the Municipal
levelby BaFuturu)
2. Induction Training
(Trainer-mentorstrain Suco levelFamily
SupportTeam Members)
3. ParentingEducation Sessions
(Suco levelFamily SupportTeam members
conductsessions at the community level)

Figure 4: Pilot TrainingRoll Out
A. TOT for Trainer-Mentors
The first level of training was a four-day Training of Trainers (TOT) for MSS staff from
the each administrative post of Ermera and Viqueque municipalities, as well as non-MSS
personnel that were identified as potential future programme Trainer-Mentors through
the preparation and planning process. The TOT was held in Dili at Ba Futuru’s Peace
Centre from 1-4 March 2016.
Ermera and Viqueque are two municipalities of five that the Government of Timor-Leste
and UNICEF have identified as priority, or convergence, municipalities for programme
interventions.5 Two participants per administrative post from both municipalities were
included. A total of 28 people participated in the training, 15 male (54 per cent) and 13
female (46 per cent). The average age of participants was 34.5 years old. Most trainees
had previous experience in training and facilitation and less than half (43 per cent) had
attended other TOTs. The majority of the participants (64 per cent) had completed
secondary school and a smaller number (25 per cent) had a Bachelor’s degree.
The TOT programme was designed as a four-day workshop, which was intended to
familiarise future trainer-mentors with the content of the parenting programme
5 The other convergence municipalities includeAileu,Covalima,the Oe-Cusse Ambeno Special Administrative
Region and, for child protection issues,Díli.
28 Trainer-mentors trained in Dili
1-4 March 2016
24 suco level faciliatators trained in
Railaco, Ermera
14-15 March 2016
5 parenting education sessions
held in Railaco
(255 people trained in 6 sucos)
16-19 March 2016
27 suco level faciliatators trained in
Uatolari, Viqueque
14-15 March 2016
6 parenting education sessions
held in Uatolari
(354 people trained in 6 sucos)
16-19 March 2016

modules. Throughout the training, a participatory methodology was used wherein
facilitators engaged the participants in learning, discussion and practice of the
community session modules. The training topics covered the concept and structure of
the programme, facilitation strategies and tips, and the first four modules of the
implementation manual that include General Parenting and Introduction to the
programme, Early Stimulation, Child Protection and Alternative Discipline.
B. Induction Training in Municipalities
The second step in the process was the induction training in which TOT participants
conducted training of future parenting education session facilitators in Railaco, Ermera
and Uatolari, Viqueque. On average, two to three people from each suco were invited to
attend the training, with Xefi Suco responsible for selecting the most appropriate
participants.
Four advanced facilitators from Ba Futuru supported the trainer-mentors in providing
the training. The agenda for the trainings is provided in Annex I.
The two-day induction trainings were conducted from 14-15 March 2016 in Railaco
administrative post in Ermera and Uatolari administrative post in Viqueque. The
induction training covered the programme structure, facilitation skills and the first two
modules (Programme Introduction/General Parenting and Early Stimulation). It was
not deemed possible to cover all four modules included in the TOT in two days with a
group of less experienced facilitators. A total of 51 participants attended the training in
the two municipalities.
More than half the participants reported having some prior experience in training and
facilitation, and a sizeable percentage reported having a considerable amount of
experience in training and facilitation (25 per cent in Railaco and 41 per cent in
Uatolari). Table 1 presents the level of training experience among participants. The
highest level of education among a majority of the participants, roughly two-thirds of
the trainees, was secondary schooling. The age and gender distribution of training
participants are presented in Table 2.
Table 1: PreviousExperience inTraining and FacilitationAmongst InductionTraining Participants
Admin Post No experience Some experience A lot of experience
RAILACO 0% 58% 25%
UATOLARI 0% 55% 41%
Table 2: Characteristicsof Induction Training Participants
AdminPost Participants Men Women Avg. Age Age Range
RAILACO 24 14 (58%) 10 (42%) 33.5 22 to 60
UATOLARI 27 10 (37%) 17 (63%) 40.7 28 to 60
Total 51 24 (48%) 27 (52%)

1. Railaco, Ermera
A total of 24 participants, representing six out of the nine suco villages of Railaco
Administrative Post, attended the training in Ermera municipality. Participants from
Fataquero, Liho, Railaco Leten, Samalete, Taraço and Tocoluli Suco were able to attend
the training. Previously selected participants from the other five suco villages of the
administrative post were unable to attend due to heavy rains that made travel very
difficult to impossible. Participants included three hamlet chiefs (Xefi Aldeia), other
Suco Council Members, and youth representatives. Figure 5 presents the roles and
positions of trainees in the induction training. Table 3 shows the number of trainees
from each suco.
The 24 participants in the induction training came to the process with varying levels of
experience in training programmes, parenting education, and these differences proved
to be important in their subsequent ability to effectively facilitate the parenting
education sessions. This will be discussed further in the results section.
Figure 5: Roles and PositionsofInduction Training Participants, Railaco, Ermera
Suco Council
Member
39%
Xefe Aldeia
12%
Women’s
Representative
10%
Female Youth
Representative
6%
Male Youth
Representative
3%
PAAS (Suco
Support
Personnel)
3%
Deskudit
(Catholic
Youth
Organisation)
3%
Community
Member
12%
Youth
9%
PSF (Other)
3%
Roles and Positions of Induction Training Participants, Ermera

Table 3: RepresentationofInductionTraining Participants by Suco inRailaco, Ermera
2. Uatolari, Viqueque
In Viqueque, a total of 27 participants representing all six suco villages of Uatolari
Administrative Post attended the training in Viqueque Municipality. Participants
included three village chiefs (Xefi Suco), as well as one Xefi Aldeia, other Suco Council
Members, members of the Organizasaun Popular da Mulher de Timor (OPMT) and the
national women’s network Rede Feto, preschool teachers and a Child Protection Officer.
Figure 6 presents the roles and positions of the trainees in the induction training. Table
4 shows the number of trainees from each suco.
Figure 6: Roles and PositionsofInduction Training Participants, Uatolari,Viqueque
Suco Council
Member, 48%
Xefe Suco,
11%
Xefe Aldeia, 4%
Women’s
Representative, 4%
Female Youth
Representative,
19%
PAAS, 11%
Child Protection
Officer, 4%
Member OPMT /
Rede Feto, 11%
Preschool
Teacher, 11%
Youth,
8%
PHK-OHS, 4%
Roles and Positions of Induction Training Participants, Viqueque
Suco Number of Participants
Deleso 0
Fataquero 3
Liho 7
Matata 0
RailacoCraic 0
RailacoLeten 7
Samalete 2
Taraço 2
Tocoluli 3
Total 24

Table 4: RepresentationofInductionTraining Participants by Suco – Uatolari, Viqueque
C. Parenting Education Sessions at the Community Level
The third step was for the community level facilitators to lead the Parenting Education
Sessions,at community level, as well as provide follow-up support for vulnerable
families through home visits and peer support groups.
Following the induction training, 11 community sessions were carried out at the suco
level from 16-19 March 2016. The induction training participants from each suco led
their respective parenting education sessions with support from Ba Futuru advanced
facilitators. The duration of each parenting education session was two hours and was
attended by 609 parents across two pilot municipalities.
Induction training participants organised the parenting education sessions together
with local authorities such as Xefi Suco, Xefi Aldeia and other Suco Council Members.
The dates for each parenting education session were decided in the Induction Training,
so that Ba Futuru facilitators could observe all of the sessions. Public announcements
and personal invitations served to inform parents in the communities about the
sessions, which were well-attended, with double or triple the expected number of
participants. The parenting education sessions were held at suco administrative offices,
which provide a natural meeting place for community-level meetings and activities.
Other preparations for the parenting education sessions involved setting up chairs and
otherwise preparing the meeting space. Ba Futuru facilitators spoke with local
authorities before and after the more than two-hour sessions; planned post-session
focus group discussions were not held due to lack of time.
Table 5: Parentingeducationsessions heldin Ermera
No. Date Place Participants
1 16 March 2016 Suco Liho 56
2 17 March 2016 Suco Samalete 21
3 17 March 2016 Suco Railaco Leten 38
4 18 March 2016 Suco Taraço 54
5 18 March 2016 Suco Tokoluli & Suco Fatuquero 86
Total 255
Suco Number of Participants
Afaloicai 4
Babulo 4
Macadique 5
Mataboi 7
Uaitame 3
Vessoru 4
Total 27

Table 6: Parentingeducationsessions heldin Viqueque
No. Date Place Participants
1 17 March 2016 Suco Vessoru 60
2 17 March 2016 Suco Babulo 57
3 18 March 2016 Suco Afaloicai 88
4 18 March 2016 Suco Uatame 46
5 19 March 2016 Suco Macadique 39
6 19 March 2016 Suco Matahoi 64
Total 354
IV. Results from Pilot Activities
Ba Futuru facilitators led the TOT and supervised the induction trainings and parenting
education sessions. Their role was to provide support and mentoring for the newly-
trained trainer-mentors and community level facilitators. Ba Futuru facilitators also
administered pre- and post-training assessment questionnaires for both TOT and
induction training participants and observed the knowledge and skills of the trainer-
mentors and the community level facilitators. TOT and induction training participants
also completed daily feedback forms so that Ba Futuru facilitators could receive real-
time feedback about the quality and effectiveness of the training. Ba Futuru facilitators
observed parenting education sessions, making notes of the session facilitators’ ability
to present information, lead activities and facilitate discussion. They also spoke with
community leaders before and after the sessions various aspects of facilitation skills to
gather their insights and observations. The M&E tools used throughout the pilot
activities are presented in Annex III.
A. TOT for Trainer-Mentors
The results from the pre- and post- assessments of the TOT confirmed the existence of a
wide range of knowledge on general parenting and children’s needs, early stimulation,
child protection and positive discipline. For example, there was a very high level of
awareness (over 90 per cent) on the importance of parents in a child’s development and
in the role of active and engaged fathers. Almost all participants (96 per cent) were able
to give examples of children’s needs, but only 25 per cent included parents’ love,
affection and/or protection in their explanation. After the TOT, an increased number of
participants (78 per cent) mentioned parent’s love, affection and/or protection in their
explanation of children’s needs, and 52 per cent provided three or more examples of
different types of needs, whereas before the TOT only 32 per cent were able to do so.
TOT participants were assessed in their knowledge of parenting issues related to early
stimulation, child protection and alternative discipline. While they showed an increase
in knowledge in several areas, in some areas the change was either minor or even
negative. This could be attributed to several factors. First, in some cases participants did

not complete the post-training questionnaire due to the length of the sessions. Second,
there was some attrition of respondents between the pre and post surveys. Third, some
questions were skipped, particularly in the post-session questionnaires. Finally, there
was feedback from participants that they had to fill out too many forms and they may
have been tired or disinterested in providing feedback immediately after the session. A
proposal for more detailed monitoring of a fully implemented parenting programme is
provided in the recommendation section. However, for the purpose of a pilot
intervention, the data received does indicate some areas where there have been shifts
in participants’ knowledge and beliefs, and others in which messaging could be re-
tailored as the programme continues.
In the area of early stimulation, after the TOT, 91% of participants identified the
newborn stage as when parents should start teaching children, an increase from 54 per
cent before the training. 87%of participants were able to mention examples of early
stimulation to help young children’s development.
In the area of child protection, the participants gained an improved ability to explain the
negative impacts of child abuse as well as what parents can do to protect their children
from abuse. Whereas before the TOT only 32%could explain negative impacts of child
abuse, after the TOT 61%were able to explain specific negative impacts of child abuse
on children in the present and for their future. Before the training only 54% could
explain what parents can do to protect their children from abuse, but after the training
this rose to 74%. Confidence about personal ability to share specific strategies with
parents to help them protect children also increased, from 86% (36% confident, 50%
very confident) to 96% (35% confident, 61% very confident).
In the area of alternative discipline, after the TOT 83%of participants could explain the
difference between discipline and punishment, compared with only 21% who could do
this before the TOT. Before the training only 7%provided alternative (also sometimes
referred to as non-violent or positive) discipline strategies, but after the TOT there was
a substantial increase to 83%. Before the training 43% of participants’ explanation was
that parents must “speak nicely”, but after the training 57% could list two to three
specific alternative discipline strategies and an additional 26% could list one alternative
discipline strategy. Interestingly, even though only 26% of participants could provide
an explanation before the training as to why using non-violent discipline is best, 86%
felt confident (39% confident, 50% very confident) about their ability to share non-
violent discipline strategies with parents, showing a disconnect between confidence and
actual knowledge. However, after the TOT 65% of participants could explain why non-
violent discipline is best, with many referencing children’s positive development and
other arguments from the programme materials.
In terms of programme knowledge, 83% of TOT participants reported feeling
“prepared” (70%) or “very prepared” (13%) to facilitate a two-day training to
community leaders so that they can, in turn, conduct community sessions with parents.

An additional 17% felt “not very prepared”. Giving many opportunities to participants
to share ideas and experiences was identified by all participants as being more
important than being an expert on the discussion topic. However, knowledge about the
programme basics was lower than expected, with only 70% identifying that each
community session should have a duration of two hours, and only 48% correctly
identifying that each community session has five parts. 87% correctly answered that
the implementation manual has scripts for the facilitator to read, but only 48% were
able to explain who can become members of the Family Support Team. 65% listed
some basic preparatory steps to take before conducting a community session.
Confidence of participants about their own understanding following the TOT was high,
with 100% stating they understood the objectives and structure of the Hametin Familia
Programme (48% good understanding, 52% medium understanding). They also
reported feeling that they understood the four modules and activities to conduct the
community sessions (43% good understanding, 52% medium understanding). Again,
all participants felt that the TOT was helpful in increasing and strengthening their
capacity as a trainer or facilitator (48% increased/strengthened somewhat, 48%
increased/strengthened a lot).
B. Induction Training in Municipalities
In the area of general parenting, there were notable differences between participants in
Railaco and those from Uatolari. For example, prior to the training in Railaco, 100% of
participants identified parents as having the biggest influence on children’s
development, compared with 50% in Uatolari. The number increased to 82% of
participants in Uatolari and remained constant in Railaco. Prior to the training, only a
small number of participants mentioned parents’ love, affection and/or protection in
their description of children’s needs (25% in Railaco and 9% in Uatolari). However,
after the training this increased to 33% in Railaco and 55% in Uatolari.
In the topic area of early stimulation, both training groups demonstrated an increase in
knowledge about the importance of the first three years for babies’ cognitive
development. After the training, the age at which participants thought that parents
should start teaching their children decreased, but this change was more pronounced in
Uatolari than in Railaco. Before the training, many participants were not able to give an
example of something that parents can do to help their young children’s development
(in Railaco 42% could not and in Uatolari 68% could not). However, after the training,
the majority in both groups were able to give examples (92% in Railaco and 68% in
Uatolari). Additionally, 92% of participants in Railaco mentioned early stimulation
examples, along with 68% in Uatolari.

C. Suggested Improvements in TOT and Induction Training Activities
The pilot pointed to a number of areas that needed improving for future roll out.
 Training time insufficient: The pilot clearly pointed to two days for Induction
Training being insufficient. This was the same for both Railaco and Uatolari in
that two days was not sufficient for the induction training participants to learn
both the material (modules 1-2) and how to facilitate a community session.
Condensing the four-day TOT into a two-day induction training was simply not
feasible, even though the content was decreased to cover only two modules. Ba
Futuru’s advanced facilitators involved in the whole process suggested the
induction training be five days, or at a minimum four days. Over the course
of the pilot parenting education sessions at community level it was noted that
the suco-level facilitators could not remember exactly what they were supposed
to do and required extensive support from the Ba Futuru trainers. In Viqueque,
the suco facilitators led the community session in a local language, making it
more difficult for the Ba Futuru trainers to provide support and mentoring. It
was also felt that a one-time training was not sufficient to build local capacity.
 Inadequate facilitation skills of trainer-mentors: Though several of the TOT
participants had previous experience in conducting training, they did not have
adequate capacity or experience to lead the induction trainings. Several
participants expressed a need for more training, mentoring and/or
evaluation for facilitators before going on to become trainers. Facilitators
lacked the skills needed to capture new information from the training. Induction
training participants who went on to conduct parenting education sessions did
not feel comfortable sharing information in the community, particularly when
they met with the suco facilitators in the village with higher skill level than them.
 Improved Selection Process for Participants. During the community sessions
the Ba Futuru facilitators were made aware that there were some suco-level
facilitators who had facilitation skills and experience but were not chosen for the
Induction Training. Suco-level facilitators asked for the selection process to be
undertaken more thoroughly and diligently so that those who had already been
identified as facilitators could be involved in programme leadership and
facilitation. For example, in the five sucos of Uatolari Administrative Post where
community sessions took place, each suco village had designated facilitator/s (in
many cases preschool volunteers) who had received various trainings provided
by organisations and the government. While the purpose of the training was
communicated orally and in writing during the pilot coordination, ultimately the
Xefi Suco was responsible for choosing invitees. In the future, additional
oversight from MSS would be required. More information on what is
required and why (i.e., the desired skill set and experience level) should be
made clear in written and oral communication with local leadership such
as Xefi Suco and also Xefi Aldeia. Some of those who were chosen by Xefi Suco
could not read and write, but were well-respected in the community. Reading,
writing and critical thinking are essential skills needed to facilitate parenting

education sessions, due to the text-based IEC materials that are intended to be
used in the delivery of sessions. The communication to Xefi Suco about forming
the Family Support Team (Grupu Hametin Familia) should advise the Xefi Suco
to put together a group of five to 12 key actors in the village who have previous
facilitation experience combined with skills such as grassroots organizing and
communication. In addition to communication, facilitation and organizing skills,
those selected for training as parenting education sessions facilitators, will also
need to be literate. Other key actors in the community who cannot read and
write can still play a vital role on the Family Support Team through helping
organise sessions, assisting with follow-up support and promoting key messages
in the village.
 Inadequate training time spent on teaching programme structure. The key
elements that trainees at both levels needed to master were the steps and
duration of each community session, who can become a member of the Family
Support Team and what preparatory steps should be taken prior to the
parenting education session. While participants generally expressed high levels
of confidence about their knowledge and understanding, this was often not
matched by actual knowledge of the programme itself. For future roll out of
activities, it is recommended that more attention be given during TOT and
induction trainings to the description, explanation and discussion around
the programme structure itself, how each community session is designed to
include five steps in two hours, and what the Family Support Team can do
as a group every three months to have their activities run more smoothly
and effectively.
“The material from the two-day training is so very important for us, because it’s woken us
up to know information that we can turn around and share with parents. I will implement
Hametin Familia Programme myself in my own household, to prepare a good future for
my children. I feel fairly confident to be able to share with the community as well […] in
order to improve their children’s future. Although I think that there are still many
challenges that will need to be faced, especially if questions arise from the community, I
will try to respond to the best of my ability. I believe that there will be other facilitators
who will be able to help me.”
Candida da Silva, Representative Organizasaun Popular da Mulher de Timor (OPMT),
Induction Training Uatolari Participant
“The Hametin Familia model is really wonderful, and I feel very proud to be able to have
this opportunity to come and learn this material. In the materials, it taught us how to be
able to continue to share this information in our own community. I understand about the
objective from the information; Hametin Familia, this is about how parents or people who
take care of children can give their time to be together with their children. Fathers also

have an important role to speak with and take care of their children’s development in
their lives. I feel that two days for the Induction Training, this was very short because we
need to study a lot before sharing with the community.”
Hermelinda de Oliveira, Induction Training Railaco Participant, Women’s Representative
(Elected Suco Council Member) from Suco Liho, Railaco, Ermera
D. Parenting Education Sessions at the Community Level
The following strengths were observed in the community level pilot.
 High level of enthusiasm: Community members were very interested to attend
and learn new information. This was observed in both Ermera and Viqueque,
with overall high attendance and high levels of enthusiasm about the pilot
programme and the new community level training modality.
 Parenting Education Sessions Materials were well-received: In Ermera, Ba
Futuru facilitators noted that the facilitators of parenting education sessions and
participants alike were very excited about the implementation manual activities
and information. Topics such as ‘the role of fathers in a child’s life’ were of
particular interest. As one Ba Futuru advanced facilitator who was observing
community sessions in Ermera noted: “Fathering and the fathering-related topics,
this was something new for them. They know fathers are important but they didn’t
know practical ways that fathers could get more involved. They thought that
fathers holding a baby was just something enjoyable, but in the end they learned
that fathers holding babies was also connected to child development.” In
Viqueque, participants were also very interested and happy to hear the
information. However, the phrase ‘the role of fathers’ was new to them and
required discussion of the implications and meaning.
 Coordination between MSS and community. In Railaco, it was observed that
there were good lines of coordination between MSS and community leaders and
members. This helped with organising and planning for the community sessions,
including spreading information at the local level about upcoming sessions. This
was observed more strongly in Railaco than in Uatolari. One aspect that could
potentially be improved was to follow the established communication chain
of MSS more closely.
 Use of local languages considered beneficial. In Viqueque the parenting
education sessions were mainly led in local languages, while in Ermera they
were held in Tetun (which is commonly spoken throughout Ermera). In
Viqueque, where Tetun is spoken by fewer people (or is a second language)
having the parenting education sessions in the local language was helpful for
participants to be able to understand and participate in the activities. Promoting

local languages (provided that facilitators have a strong understanding of the
material) is a good way to make sure that people can understand and engage.
 Programme flipchart (IEC materials) were well-received. Two versions of
the flipchart were used for pre-testing purposes. Both versions had a front and
back format with images on the front, and text on the back. The difference
between the two flipcharts was that one had some explanatory text on the front
pages, whereas the second one had very minimal text with the images. The first
flipchart, with some explanatory text on the front, was preferred by parenting
education session participants in both Ermera and Viqueque. The feedback
provided during the community sessions was that the facilitator needed to see
the explanation on the front of the page in order to be able to explain it correctly
to the participants. Even though many participants could not read, or were
seated too far away to read the words, the facilitators were able to read the
explanation printed on the page, which helped ensure that the correct
information was given and increased facilitator confidence. Participants
also reported preferring flipchart pages with many photos rather than those
with just one or two images per page, and were especially inspired by the
positive fathering images.
The following feedback on areas for improvement were noted in the pilot:
 Limited facilitation experience at the suco level: Participants in the induction
trainings who then led the community sessions did not have previous experience
as facilitators or trainers. In Ermera, Ba Futuru observers noted that when
participants asked questions, the suco facilitators did not really know how to
respond. They believed this was due to the suco facilitators’ skill level as
trainers -- while they knew how to read and write, they didn’t really have the
capacity to use the new information from the training to facilitate a session.
 Parents unable to share programme information: The parenting programme
encourages community members to share information they learn or found
interesting with their family, friends and neighbours. As one Ba Futuru
facilitator stated, “It’s possible that parents will participate but not share
information with others. Reminding each other is possible, but informing is not
possible, or not yet possible. They don’t feel very comfortable with the idea of
teaching each other because they are all on the same level as community
members.” While this is the view of only one facilitator, it is worth considering
the social conventions in the communities in which the programme is
implemented and whether special attention should be paid to these issues in the
parenting education sessions.
 Two hours was insufficient: The parenting education session content is meant
to be two hours per module. However, throughout the pilot the material of
Module 1 consistently took three to three and a half hours to get through. Part of

the problem was that people came late to the session. Another issue was that
since facilitators were not experienced or fully confident on the manual
activities, it took longer for them to lead and explain the activities. Most
participants stayed until the end of the session, but some left before the session
was over. It was also observed that many people came very long distances
(mainly on foot) to attend the community session. For this reason, lengthening
the session duration and potentially providing the sessions at the aldeia
level or on a clustered basis (with aldeias that are close together attending
one session, with separate sessions for remote aldeias, as needed) would
be advisable. When asked about whether the suco-level facilitators would have
the interest and ability to do this, the Ba Futuru facilitators said it would be
important to have this included in their job descriptions and the orientation
they receive from MSS (even if they are voluntary positions). As one Ba
Futuru facilitator said, “When it’s part of their job, they can do it.”
 Limit participant numbers: A very large number of participants turned up for
the sessions. In the last session in Railaco, two sucos combined to have one
community session and there were well over 100 people in attendance. This
made it very difficult for the facilitators to manage the session and carry out the
various activities, such as breaking into small groups for discussion. Thus it is
recommended that suco villages should conduct their community sessions
individually and not combine them. There were also issues with
participants not being able to hear, because some facilitators spoke very
softly. With the large number of people, the facilitators’ voices could not
carry far enough to reach the entire audience. In Viqueque,
recommendations emerged to have the community sessions at the aldeia
level due to participant numbers averaging between 70-80 people.
 Ensure alignment with MSS systems and processes: In Viqueque, an issue
was raised about how it would be good to inform local level MSS staff about their
work well in advance so that they can include it in their trimestral plan. Based on
Phase 1 Recommendations, however, the programme materials were designed
for a quarterly format. It would be beneficial to adjust the design to fit
trimesters, to streamline into MSS systems and processes. A Ba Futuru facilitator
who observed the parenting education sessions at community level in Viqueque
shared that in preparation for the pilot they often received requests that came
directly from the national level to the local level. “The hierarchical system needs
to be followed correctly. If not, this can cause conflicts amongst the people who
should be working together, and it is not seen as very respectful.” For example,
some feedback shared was that when a request is received from the national
level recipients feel it is very urgent, but they also have daily work that needs to
be done. If the request does not inform their supervisor or co-workers then they
will not be aware of the request from the national level. At times this has caused

tension in the workplace and can also impact programme implementation and
effectiveness.
 Emphasize focus on parenting topics: In Ermera some parenting education
session participants said veterans were invited in addition to Bolsa da Mãe
(Mother’s Purse) recipients, parents from the local community and veterans
attended the parenting education sessions. The presence of veterans appears to
have distracted some participants and led to some confusion about the purpose
of the sessions. Ba Futuru facilitators were able to convince the Xefi Suco that
veterans were also parents and should attend the session. The Xefi Suco then
explained that the veterans were attending the sessions as parents and not as
veterans. This points to the need to emphasize that the primary focus and
objective of the session is parenting and all parents are welcome to attend.
 Provision of refreshments: In the five community sessions in Uatolari, food and
drinks expenses ($50 per session) were paid out-of-pocket by MSS personnel. In
Ermera no food or drinks were provided. In both locations it was
recommended that a minimal contribution be provided to organizers of
parenting education sessions ($50 per session) for coffee, tea and a simple
snack or at least water for people to drink. As one Ba Futuru facilitator
observed: “In Timor-Leste normally when people come together there is some kind
of coffee for people to drink. When this is not provided it can make people feel
uncomfortable, especially the organizers of the event.” Another aspect of this
recommendation is that many people had come from far away, and the time of
the parenting education session increased from two hours (as was
communicated in public announcements) to three or nearly four hours.
 Change mapping exercise: There was feedback in many of the parenting
education sessions that the mapping activity led to an expectation that MSS
would provide money for community members to improve their suco. This is
because previous mapping activities at the local level nearly always included
money for certain projects to be undertaken or for infrastructure improvements
in the village. As a result of feedback, the community mapping component from
Module 1 of the Community Sessions Implementation Manual was changed to an
activity involving the drawing of a child and discussing what that child needed in
order to grow and develop well. This idea, which was well-received by those
involved with revisions to the Manual following the pilot, has been used
successfully by Ba Futuru as part of other training programmes.
 Adapt Implementation Manual: Participants from the trainings and the
parenting education sessions suggested either to shorten explanations, simplify
or change certain words in the implementation manual. This has been done in
collaboration with MSS and UNICEF in a workshop following the pilot activities.
Some also accepted that the flipchart might be sufficient for the parenting

education sessions; future pilot sessions should consider this possibilty. This
feedback informed the development of the follow-up support framework, which
shows how Family Support Team members can use the flipchart to lead peer
support groups and carry out home visits covering the basic information of each
module.
“The training we’ve just received is extremely important and we ask that there must be
continued training like this going forward, involving even more people so that the y can
understand that caring for children well… involves playing with them, stimulating them…
We need support when we bring the community together, we need sufficient time and
mentoring from MSS and UNICEF… so the community… knows the information we are
sharing is not from us alone but also comes from the Government/MSS and UNICEF so
that parents can trust and commit to participation.”
Lorenco de Jesus, Induction Training Uatolari Participant, Child Protection Officer from
Suco Matahoi, Uatolari, Viqueque
V. Suggested Next Steps
Based on the feedback received from facilitators and participants and the findings from
the assessment of the pilot the following are next steps that would enable roll out:
1. National and sub-national coordinationand planning
Organize a planning workshop with government stakeholders and key line
ministries to discuss and develop a Hametin Familia Programme working group
that could lead and guide the parenting programme at the national level. This
group should be led by MSS but could include all relevant partners such as the
Ministries of Health, Education, Justice, Secretariat of State for Youth and Sports,
INGO/NGO stakeholders and development partners. The working group should meet
regularly to coordinate/plan the programme. The findings of the pilot should be shared
with this group, which should provide overall management and oversight to the
programme, including planning future phases of the roll out and oversight of
monitoring and evaluation at the national level. The national level working group
should coordinate with the Programa Hametin Familia Focal Point (MSS) at the
municipal level and the MSS Social Support Worker (MSS) & Trainer-Mentor Team at
the administrative post level. Specific tasks should include:
National level
1. Set up the Working Group and plan for regular meetings – four- or six-monthly
2. Determine programme intervention sites and roll out details
3. Finalise and approve programme IEC materials

4. Increase and further solidify ownership from key government partners
5. Disseminate materials and resources to municipal focal points
6. Compile M&E data from municipal focal points, adapting programme
components as necessary
7. Facilitate ‘piggy-backing’ onto other initiatives, strengthening inter-sectoral
collaboration amongst public and private stakeholders (INGOs/NGOs may be
encouraged to seek donor funds to broaden programme implementation)
8. Liaise with Secretariat of State for Communications (SECOMS) for development,
dissemination and promotion of national to mid-level media materials
9. Provide oversight/coordination support to Master Trainers and training agency.
Municipal level
1. Liaise with national level Working Group on planning and coordination for
monitoring and evaluation of programme activities
2. Collect M&E data from administrative post team, reporting to national level
3. Disseminate materials (i.e., training, IEC, media) to administrative post level
4. Conduct regular meetings (i.e., (quarterly, biannually, or annually) with
administrative post teams to facilitate peer mentoring and information sharing
about programme successes and challenges.
Administrative post level
1. Provide coordination and planning support to suco level Family Support Teams
(on-going mentoring)
2. Report quarterly to Municipal Focal Point.
2. Training
It is recommended that a future scale up should identify Master Trainers with at least
three years of training experience who can be employed by MSS to provide programme
training together with a training agency, which is discussed further in the
recommendations section of this report. This core group of master trainers will need to
be trained and receive mentoring from experienced facilitators over an extended period
of time. It is recommended UNICEF tender for a training agency (see estimated
costings spreadsheet) to train 10 master trainers who will become increasingly
able to provide high-quality training independently over the course of a three- to
five-year programme cycle. The TOT should be conducted over six days, one day each
for the basic programme structure, general facilitation skills and each of the first four
modules. This will cover the content for the first year of the programme. For the second
year of the programme, a second TOT for master trainers should be conducted. The
master trainer will in turn train the suco level facilitators and cover the parenting

education session content for the remaining six modules over the second and third year
of the programme. In the first year, two master trainers should provide training
workshops alongside two advanced facilitators from a training agency; whereas in the
second year this could decrease to one training agency facilitator. A similar model is
currently being carried out by Ba Futuru with the Ministry of the Interior based on its
request to provide training and capacity building for Ministry trainers. This model has
shown promising results and is a way to increase sustainability through strengthening
government capacity in facilitation skills.
Training workshops at the administrative post level should be led by the MSS Master
trainers and advanced facilitators from a training agency as described above over five
days. The training agency selected should have a substantial amount of experience in
training trainers and providing mentoring. The training agency facilitators can work
side by side over the course of the programme, reducing their input as MSS Master
Trainers gain experience, skills and confidence. It is also recommended that both the
suco and administrative post participants are trained together at the administrative
post by the master trainers. Once the trainings are completed the master trainers
should continue to mentor, coordinate and liaise with local level trainers. Follow-up
mentoring sessions after the first community session and mid-year have been budgeted
to allow for feedback and additional training. Specific tasks should include:
1. Master trainers should receive 6-day TOT from training agency on Hametin
Familia Programme, Facilitation Skills, and Modules 1-4 of Community Sessions
Implementation Manual. The training agency should provide ongoing mentoring.
2. Master trainers should conduct 5-day Induction Trainings at the administrative
post level with selected members of Family Support Teams from the Suco Level.
The administrative post level team of one MSS Social Support Worker and one
new trainer-mentor should also attend this training.
3. Master trainers should conduct two follow-up/mentoring sessions with the
induction training participants during Year 1.
4. In Year 2, Master trainers participate in a second TOT on Modules 5-10.
5. Following the second TOT, Master trainers provide induction trainings at the
administrative post level and additional follow-up mentoring/ support.
6. Report to Programa Hametin Familia Working Group.
3. Launch activities
Once the locations are identified a series of pre-launch activities will need to be
conducted in the selected areas. These will include national and municipal level
activities to gain visibility and inform people about the programme. At the local level
efforts will be needed at the administrative post and suco levels to inform people about
the programme and also to select participants for the training. Messaging for

encouraging participants and ways to encourage participants could be determined by
the working group. Specific tasks under this activity include:
1. Decide on launch dates and locations
2. Develop and distribute visibility material for launch activities
3. Plan launch activities at the national level
4. Plan launch activities at the local level.
4. Media, communications and IEC materials
The design of the parenting programme builds on the idea of reinforcing media
messages with on the ground community-based efforts. The radio drama serial will
need to be developed, produced and broadcast on both national radio channels and
regional community radio networks. The supporting IEC material will need to be
developed and disseminated. Concurrently, the youth theatre training (see estimated
costing spreadsheet) will need to be conducted and theatre sessions held in the selected
municipal areas. It is recommended that the youth theatre activities be conducted
through a local high school or youth centre. Discussion groups and listeners groups are
an important component of these activities that will increase effectiveness and
sustainability. Specific tasks under this activity include:
1. Finalise and disseminate materials (i.e., training, IEC, media) to administrative
post level
2. Develop and broadcast radio programme
3. Train youth groups on theatre activities
4. Test theatre scripts
5. Conduct theatre performances followed by discussion
6. Set up local level listener groups (for radio).
5. Local level implementation
The working group along with partners will need to identify the locations where the
parenting education sessions at community level will be implemented. It is
recommended that the programme be implemented in either Ermera and / or Viqueque
Municipalities to begin with and then expanded to the other three convergence
municipalities. A basic costing has been provided and can be adapted to the number of
intervention sites by changing the number of municipalities and administrative posts.
Following the training at the administrative post level, the programme activities will
need to be implemented at the suco and aldeia levels. Family Support Teams comprised
of 5-12 key actors from each suco will be established and will in turn lead the suco level
activities. The activities will include both the parenting education sessions at
community level and follow-up support comprised of home visits and peer support

groups. It is suggested that two-hour long parenting education sessions are held on a
quarterly basis for 20-30 parents. Aldeia focal points will be selected from among the
Family Support Team and will manage the home visits, peer support group and serve as
important channels of word-of-mouth communication. For the follow-up support it is
recommended that a minimum of 20 home visits per suco per quarter are conducted
and at least two peer support group meetings with 10-15 people are conducted every
quarter. This is consistent with the M&E Framework provided as a separate
deliverable of this phase 2 project. The specific tasks under this activity will include:
Suco level:
1. Meet quarterly to determine local communication strategy for key messages
of the focus area
2. Organise and conduct one parenting education session every three months
3. Promote key messages through word-of-mouth communication and support
efforts involving youth theatre and community radio
4. Plan and conduct follow-up support including home visits and peer support
groups
5. Report monthly to Administrative Post Trainer-Mentor and/or MSS Social
Support Worker.
Aldeia level:
1. Carry out follow-up activities each quarter to reinforce key messages
2. Promote parenting education sessions and invite parents and caregivers to
attend, particularly those in need of additional support such as
parents/caregivers of children with special needs and young/adolescent
parents
3. Work in teams or individually to carry out home visits with households
identified as in need of additional support due to distance or situational
factors
4. Liaise and build relationships with existing small groups in the aldeia in
order to build peer support groups and ‘piggy-back’ parenting education and
support activities with existing initiatives at the grassroots level.
6. Monitoring andEvaluation
On-going coordination along with monthly reporting from the suco to the
administrative post level will be needed. In addition, quarterly reporting from
administrative post to the municipality level, and six-monthly reporting from
municipality to the national level is recommended. The Programme Working Group,
established at the national level will provide oversight and coordination support to both
MSS Master Trainers and local level trainers. The working group will also oversee the

overall programme and make necessary adjustments and re-planning for the next phase
of the programme.
The programme has been designed based on a comprehensive KAP survey on parenting
practices. It is recommended that this baseline survey be followed up with a midline
and endline survey (see estimated costing spreadsheet) to enable the changes in
knowledge, attitudes and practices based on the programme activities to be measured
and tracked. Specific tasks under this activity should include:
1. Establish a M&E sub-committee within the working group
2. Decide on the timeline for the programme so the mid-line and end-line surveys
can be planned
3. Identify a local research agency to carry out the surveys and potentially an
international research expert to oversee the surveys
4. Finalise indicators, select monitoring sites and develop tools
5. Train municipal and administrative post level actors on monitoring and
reporting.
“Through this programme we learnt how to accompany our children’s development as
they grow… We also had the opportunity to go and continue to share this information
with those in the community. But, I can say that the time was too short for us to learn
well, because when we’re going to go share this information we need to study and
practice a lot. It’s because of this that, if possible, this information should be shared not
only in Ermera but also with communities all across Timor.”
Napolito C. Madeira, 23, Induction Training Railaco Participant, Representative of the
Group Dejukdil [Catholic youth group], Suco Railaco Leten, Railaco, Ermera
“I ask the Ministry (MSS) and UNICEF to give more training next month. We ask the
Ministry MSS and UNICEF to continue to increase this programme in the coming
months/year so that we can understand the programme thoroughly, so that we can go
down the suco and aldeia levels for implementation with communities.”
A 29 year old female TOT participant

VI. Pilot Assessment Issues and Recommendations
This section includes additional details of some of the challenges and issues identified
during the pilot and specific recommendations to address them in future
implementations.
1. Logistical challengeswere evident during the pilot.
Overall Recommendation Pilot Issue
Promote local solutions and options for
implementersat the local level to ensure
improved effectiveness of training.
Examples of logistical challenges included:
 Too many people attended community sessions for teaching
and learning for them to be effective (up to 100 at times).
 Distanceto parenting education sessions an issuefor some
families.
 Sessions run over time.
SpecificRecommendations:
People at the local level should be empowered to create their own solutions to
challenges encountered during the training process.
For example:
 Parenting education sessions should include a maximum of 30 people. Facilitators
could run more sessions to reduce participant numbers if necessary. Facilitators
should apologise if they turn people away, explain that it is far busier than expected
and invite the overflow participants to return at the new proposed time.
 If an aldeia is far away, consider doing a session in that area so people don’t have to
walk.
If the sessions are lasting more than two hours, facilitators should adapt the content and
their techniques to fit the allotted time. For example, they could try to get people to
come on time, do more practice to ensure the material can be covered, consider cutting
some activities and doing them in a peer support group instead, or split one session into
two sessions.
2. There was a lack of sharing of informationamong parenting
programme stakeholders.
Find champions,bringsectors together,
and work with civil society and others to
shareinformation and piggy-back on
existinginitiatives.
 Not all stakeholders had all availableinformation on the
programme.
 Considered important to ensure best results and wide
dissemination of research material,findingsand
programme.

 MSS – as the key Government agency – should lead on developing top-level
government support. UNICEF should work with MSS to encourage them to lead.
 Find Champions at the national level who will support and promote the programme
such as the Prime Minister, President or First Lady, Ministers and Secretariats of
State, important people with an interest in this area.
 Create a Programme Working Group at the national level to liaise with municipal
focal points, receive reporting data, oversee the Master Trainers and coordinate
with SECOMS for national/municipal media campaign development and
distribution.
 Create a National Level Working Group to lead on coordination, planning and review
of monitoring and evaluation – as well as national/municipal level media campaign
distribution/development of materials. (See steps section of the report).
 The Working Group should include some development partners and INGOs and big
NGOs. Recommend: CVTL (Red Cross), Plan, Marie Stopes, CRS, Health Alliance
International, Asia Foundation, Search for Common Ground, Care and Peace Corps
which is placing a lot of people at local/rural levels. The Working Group members
should be liaising with their local level people to support the programme and for
integration – this includes the line ministries as well as the INGOs/NGOs.
 Develop mechanisms for regional and global sharing of information and research.
3. Master trainersrequiredadditional training tobe effectiveintraining
facilitators of parenting educationsessions
Select, train and mentor 10 Master Trainers
who have the skills,networks, experience
and time to take part (and ensure two
people are trained per administrativepost).
Master Trainers required more trainingand supportto deliver
effectively. Repeatedly people asked for continuous trainingto
increasetheir capacity and understandingof the material (to
really “dominate” the material and be ableto explain itwell at
the suco level). There is a lot of material to learn and being
really confidentabout what you are going to do is very important
in Timor to ensure no loss of face.
The initial pilotplan was to train one person per administrative
post. However, in the pilotTOT, two people per post were
trained - the MSS Social Animator/Social SupportWorker and
another person identified from each post to be the Master
Trainer. MSS suggested this because these MSS staff have good
networking skills,arewell known and trusted, and are good
organizers. However, they are not trainers and might not be
availableto do the followup work.

 Use a model that works effectively, such as Ba Futuru’s conflict resolution work with
the Ministry of Interior (MI). To apply that model to the parenting programme, the
training for the Master Trainers could happen at the Administrative Post level with
the suco-level facilitators (2-3 members of the Family Support Team). The Master
Trainers should follow-up with them one-month and six-months post training, so
that the facilitators at the administrative post level are learning how to do
mentoring and follow-up support for the suco level people over time. In Year 1 the
‘training agency’ providing the TOT could supply two facilitators to support each
training and while at the beginning they would do most of the facilitation, over time
the MSS Master Trainers would gradually do more. By the end of Year 1 they would
run all the training, with mentoring support from the training agency facilitators. In
Year 2, the training agency should deliver the TOT on modules 5-10 and then
provide one trainer to accompany the Master Trainers as they do the Year 2
trainings at the AP level.
 Master Trainers do the initial training, then follow-up one month later (with a one-
day refresher/mentoring session for induction training participants), and a final
follow up six months later. Subsequently, they should do the Year 2 training. In
Years 2 and 3 they should also do one or two refresher sessions.
 Monitoring and evaluation should be incorporated into these mentoring/follow-up
sessions.
 Mentoring should be at various levels throughout the programme to build
ownership and local capacity over time.
 Train two people at each administrative post instead of one as they can be
accountable to each other, provide peer support, provide cover for sickness and
maternity leave, and balance each others’ skill sets (i.e. MSS organizes and networks
and the new person can mentor suco-level people and do reporting/M&E).
4. The durationof the training for parenting educationsession facilitators
and TOTs was inadequate.
Enhance suco-level facilitator selection
processes,extend trainingtime and provide
on-going mentoring support.
 Pilottrainingtimes were not sufficient. Participants
overwhelmingly pointed to the need for more training
and ongoing support as per the recommendation above.
 The material is much broader than originally envisioned.
There are 10 modules in the implementation manual.
 Selection processes were not sufficient.In Viqueque
there were people with facilitatingexperiencenot
chosen to attend the training,whilemany people who
did attend did not have the experience.

Specific Recommendations:
 Mentoring required as per above.
 Increase Induction Training to five days, and provide on-going mentoring
through two follow-up/refresher sessions one and six months post training
(Year 1). In Year 2, provide the training with an additional two follow-ups
spread over the next two years of the programme.
 Use the four modules in volume 1 in Year 1 as well as covering an explanation of
the programme (i.e. the programme structure, who the Family Support Team is
and what they do, how each session has the same 5 steps, and that in addition to
one community session the Family Support Team will also do home visits, peer
support groups and word-of-mouth promotion of key messages). Year 1 also
needs to facilitation tips and best practice for participatory processes. In Year 2
the training will cover Modules 5-10.
 Ensure a thorough and thoughtful identification process for those who will
attend training.
 Make the objectives of the training (that they will become suco facilitators) and
the desired skill set very clear to the Xefi Suco so that they can make a good
decision about who to pick.
 Ensure this links into the monitoring and evaluation recommendations.
5. Poor communicationpractices withinMSS andGoTL administrative
structures.
Improve links with MSS – through using
existinglines of communication,usingMSS
hierarchy and enablingMSS staff to include
activities in their trimestral planning
Duringthe pilot,there was directnational to base level
communication instead of goingthrough the chain of command
(national to municipal to postu, to suco,to aldeia). This creates
problems for MSS staff because a) they consider any requests
from national as urgent and that’s stressful, b) they have other
work to do in their trimestral plan, c) their co-workers or
supervisors mightnot know they got an urgent request from
national,d) they feel it’s disrespectful to not use the chain of
command and e) itcan causeprofessional relationship conflicts.
 Change from a quarterly to a trimestral model to align withMSS reporting and planning
processes.
 Use established chain of command in MSS.

6. Next steps for scaling upof pilot programme are unclear.
Recommend that INGOs/NGOs seek funding
to assistwith roll out
Concern about how to roll out the pilotfurther.
 MSS could encourage INGOs/NGOs to seek donor funding to roll the programme out
into other municipalities as implementing partners. The model and the materials—
which are evidence-based, contextually relevant and drawn on C4D best practices—
have been developed through this Phase 2 project. Many larger NGOs and INGOs
working in Timor-Leste already have priority municipalities in which they are
implementing programmes; they may wish to add or incorporate parenting
programme activities such as the parenting education sessions into their
programming. The working group suggested in the Next Steps section of this report
would provide a good forum for MSS to coordinate with these partners and possibly
divide up territory; additionally, implementing partners would be able to share
about challenges and best practices across municipalities, which will help to
improve programme delivery over time.
 MSS should make the programme materials available to its partners including IEC
materials and planning documents such as the monitoring and evaluation
framework and the research. The costing and next steps will also be useful in this
area.
7. Inadequate monitoring data are being collected.
Enhance the frequency of monitoringdata
collection fromvarious levels,and
frequency/scope of evaluation as well as
developing M&E tools and providingan M&E
stipend to cover transportation and office-
related costs atthe local level
There was not sufficientdata collected duringthe pilotto
effectively evaluate the outcomes identified in the M & E
framework and elsewhere. This is considered importantfor best
results.
 The Master Trainer activities should incorporate M&E to show the long-term
changes. This will be much more beneficial than having one post test after the
induction training. Continual monitoring is needed to determine whether the
knowledge and attitude change is being retained over time.
 This monitoring could be linked with mentoring activities wherein the Master
Trainers would follow-up with Induction Training participants at one and six
months after the first training. Providing one-day follow-up workshops to training
participants is a method that Ba Futuru has found to be very effective at reinforcing

participants’ learning, leading to more sustainable outcomes. Given that it is not
recommended to provide any financial incentives to suco-level facilitators, the
impact of two one-day mentoring sessions at the administrative post level on
programme budgets would be modest.
 The long-term change monitoring could use the following approach:
ForInductionTrainees/ Facilitators ofParentingEducationSessions (YearOne)
Initial Training One Month Post-Training Six Months Post-Training
Measure initial knowledgechange Re-measure knowledge change
Assess perceptions of first
community session
Measure knowledge change
Measure attitudes change
Assess perceptions of subsequent
community sessions
ForParenting EducationSessionParticipants(YearOne)
Initial Parenting Education
Session
Six Months Post-Session
Measure initial knowledgechange Measure knowledge change
ForInductionTrainees/ Facilitators ofParentingEducationSessions (YearsTwo-Three)
Initial Training 1 – 5 Months Post-Training 6 – 12 Months Post-Training
Measure initial knowledgechange Re-measure knowledge change Measure knowledge change
Assess perceptions of community
sessions
ForParticipants of ParentingEducationSessions (YearsTwo-Three)
Initial PESCL Session Six Months Post-Session
Measure initial knowledgechange Measure knowledge change
 The programme would benefit from one midline evaluation and one endline
evaluation. MSS/UNICEF should seek costings on these.
 The programme would benefit from the development of further M&E tools,
based on the M&E framework.
 Pilot costing has $600/quarter per municipality to be divided up based on the
size and population of each Administrative Post. The SA/SSW + ‘mentor’ should
be checking in with the suco-level groups monthly and reporting to the
municipal level focal points quarterly.

8. An inadequate number of role models have been identifiedand
includedin the programme.
Identify and promote rolemodels throughout
the courseof the programme.
Findinga sufficientnumber of role models has not been done,
and it is considered importantfor the programme’s impact.
Parenting programme implementers should identify role models who will be able to:
 Be taken to various meetings to talk in the first instance
 Have their stories recorded in writing for inclusion in the training
 Have their stories recorded for a radio and television campaign (if funding permits).
9. Participants were not supportedwithasmall gratuity suchas
food/drinks/snacks.
Providea small amountof food during
trainings
In Viqueque people paid out of their own pockets to provide
snacks.In Ermera there was no food. All the Ba Futuru
facilitators recommended a small amountof money be provided
for coffee/snacks becausein Timor-Leste when people come
together it is common and culturally appropriateto have a
coffee/snack.
 Recommend budgeting for $50 per suco per quarter for their food costs to provide a
snack to community session participants.
10. Some participants were not clear about the purpose of the Parenting
Education Sessions at community level.
Promotion of the Parenting Education
Sessions needs to explicitly statethat they
are for parents to talk about parenting
issues
Some locals (such asveterans) sawthe MSS led meetings as an
opportunity to discuss bigger concerns aboutthe Government
and MSS, corruption and pensions.

 Improve messaging around the sessions to ensure they are not diverted by other
issues.
 Liaise with the community leaders to let them know that diverting discussions
away from parenting issues impacts children and is unfair on participants
wanting to learn.
 If veterans are coming to complain, promote that veterans have children too and
this is about parenting of children. Diplomatically recommend that the sessions
should be for parenting issues only.
11. Some community members are unable toparticipate in Parenting
Education Sessions.
Increasescopeof the community sessions
from only BdM to all parents in general
The pilotwas extended based on UNICEF/MSS decision-making
process duringthe courseof the project.
Extend the availability of the parenting programme, given the benefits to, and interest
from, the wider community in improving parenting practices.
12. Have one trainer-mentor work inpartnershipwithMSS personnelat
the administrative post level.
Developing two-person teams at the administrative post level would leverage the
mobilization and organizational capacities of the SA/SSWs while ensuring on-going
capacity building for suco-level programme implementers through a dedicated trainer-
mentor. Trainer-mentors would need to be selected by MSS in collaboration with
partners, based on local human resources and partner initiatives. The trainer-mentor
position could range from volunteer part-time to full-time paid position, dependent on
MSS resources and whether additional funds could be sourced for these positions.
Partnerships with INGOs/NGOs with national or municipal coverage may be pursued
for consistency in filling Trainer-Mentor positions; for example, in stakeholder
consultations with Cruz Vermelha Timor-Leste (CVTL, Red Cross Timor Leste) some
interest was expressed in developing such a partnership. CVTL has an extensive
volunteer network with offices in every municipality. A committed volunteership
(minimum one year time commitment, ideal two-three year commitment) could provide

an incentive to young professionals in terms of building their experience and skill set
through working directly with government programming. If promoted as a prestigious
position with a time commitment and good professional development opportunities,
this could help to offset concerns commonly associated with volunteer attrition.
This is important since the Trainer-Mentors need to receive comprehensive training on
the parenting programme package; this would be accomplished through including them
with suco-level facilitators in a series of trainings over the first two years of the
programme. Master Trainers would facilitate these trainings, focusing on providing an
enhanced level of mentoring to the Administrative Post Trainer-Mentors to build their
skills, experience and confidence. Over time the Trainer-Mentors would be able to take
over mentoring support for suco-level Family Support Teams as they carry out
parenting education sessions and follow-up support with vulnerable families. It is
recommended that the Municipal Focal Point organize four- or six-month meetings with
all Trainer-Mentors of the municipality to promote sharing and peer mentoring as well.
As the programme is rolled out in more municipalities, there is also the potential for
exchange visits of trainer-mentors to different municipalities.
13. Share the KAP report, M & E framework, midline study and endline
study, and other parenting programme documentationas widely as
possible.
While it is common practice to share executive summaries, sharing full documents
related to this programme would benefit stakeholders. At a minimum, the annexes of
documents such as the M& E framework should be translated to Tetun and shared with
stakeholders. Sharing workshops on these would be beneficial and promote the
collective ownership/steering approach suggested by the working group
recommendation.
14. Change ImplementationManual content tosimplify explanations and
make language more accessible. [completed]
The Tetun translation had too many “high words,” so this has been simplified down in to
more “everyday language” following the pilot. Also, the content for modules 1-4 that
was used for the pilot had a lot of scripts for the facilitators to use, with bullet points for
the process they should follow; they provided feedback that the manual would be easier
to use with shortened scripts and simpler numbered lists to explain the process. Based
on this feedback and in close consultation with UNICEF, all 10 modules for the
implementation manual have been simplified and revised.

15. In the implementationmanual for facilitators, change the community
map activity toa Drawing of a Childand a Children’s Needsactivity.
[completed]
The reason for this was that people at the community level thought that doing the map
envisioning everything they want in the future meant that MSS would then give them
money to do all of those things.
At the recommendation of pilot participants this was changed to a different activity
wherein an outline of a child is drawn, and then people talk about what that child needs
to grow up to be happy, smart and successful. The goal for the activity is to show that
many of these needs can be met without money.
The references to the community map have been taken out of the subsequent modules.
It now involves a review and thinking about how what they’ve learned ties in with
children’s needs.

VII. Costing
A detailed costing Excelspreadsheet has been provided to UNICEF as an attachment withthis report. A summary of costs by section is provided
below. Estimated costs fora full roll out in the two municipalities where pilot activities were conducted, Ermera and Viqueque, are provided
alongside estimated costs forUNICEF’s fivepriority areas: Aileu, Covalima, Ermera, Oe-cusse Ambeno Special Administrative Region and Viqueque.
No. Resource Description Timeline Estimated Cost
(Ermera &
Viqueque)
Estimated Cost
(5 convergence
municipalities)
I Suco-level Programme
ImplementationCosts
forsuco level communication,communitysessions,follow-upand
GrupuHametin Familia meetings
A Programme IEC Materials
Programme flipchart,posters,banner,booklets
Y1 Q1
35,061.00 66,898.00
B CommunitySessionsResources CommunitysessionsimplementationManual,Vol 1-2,facilitation
handouts,basictrainingmaterials
Y1 Q1 &
Y2 Q1 57,379.38 109,482.50
C Follow-upSupport&Programme
Group MeetingResources
Follow-upSupportFrameworksGuide,notebooks,pens Y1 Q1
14,964.00 28,552.00
Sub-Total 107,404.38 204,932.50
II Training Costs, Year1 forYear 1 (Modules1-4) TOT, InductionTrainingandfollow-
up/mentoring
A TOT for MSS Master Trainers TOT facilitation,trainingcosts,travel,materials Y1 Q1 6,694.05 6,694.05
B InductionTraining TOT facilitation,trainingcosts,travel,materials Y1 Q2 78,921.50 169,617.50
C RefresherTraining/Follow-up/
Mentoring,Year1
Mentoringfacilitation,trainingcosts,travel,materials Y1 Q2-4
17,906.00 38,870.00
Sub-Total 103,521.55 215,181.55
III Training Costs, Years2-3 forYear 2-3 (Modules5-10) TOT, InductionTrainingandfollow-
up/mentoring
A TOT for MSS Master Trainers TOT facilitation,trainingcosts,travel,materials Y2 Q1 7,078.00 7,078.00
B InductionTraining TOT facilitation,trainingcosts,travel,materials Y1 Q2 37,058.00 79,910.00
C RefresherTraining/Follow-up/
Mentoring,Years2-3
Mentoringfacilitation,trainingcosts,travel,materials Y2 Q3 –
Y3 Q1 15,572.67 33,870.00
Sub-Total 59,708.67 120,858.00

Deliverable 2 6 - Pilot Assessment Report_Final

Deliverable 2 6 - Pilot Assessment Report_Final

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Deliverable 2 6 - Pilot Assessment Report_Final

Similar to Deliverable 2 6 - Pilot Assessment Report_Final (20)

Deliverable 2 6 - Pilot Assessment Report_Final