USAID Pacific DRG Virtual Conference Final Conference Report

USAID.GOV ASIA PACIFIC DRG VIRTUAL CONFERENCE FINAL REPORT | I

ASIA PACIFIC DRG VIRTUAL CONFERENCE FINAL CONFERENCE REPORT

USAID / CAMBODIA HARVEST

USAID.GOV ASIA PACIFIC DRG VIRTUAL CONFERENCE FINAL REPORT | II

The Cloudburst Group would like to thank the USAID Conference Organization Team: Nicole Goodrich and Elizabeth Callender, along with Laura Pavlovic, David Isaak, and Blair King, for their tremendous efforts and contributions to making the Conference a success.

This report was prepared by the Cloudburst Group under Contract No. GS10F0218U/7200AA18M00017. The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government.

USAID.GOV ASIA PACIFIC DRG VIRTUAL CONFERENCE FINAL REPORT | III

CONTENTS

ACRONYMS IV

CONFERENCE APPROACH 1 VIRTUAL WHOVA PLATFORM 2 ADMINISTRATION 2 ENGAGEMENT 2

OBSERVATIONS AND INSIGHTS 3 DEMOCRACY ISSUES CONFERENCE TRACK 3 COVID-19 ADAPTATIONS CONFERENCE TRACK 5 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE TRACK 6

RECOMMENDATIONS 7 POSSIBLE TRAINING TOPICS 7 BUILDING NETWORKS/COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE 8 ONGOING CHALLENGES 8

PROCESS IMPROVEMENT AND LESSONS LEARNED 9 GENERAL 9 PLANNING 9 EXECUTION 10 TECHNOLOGY 10

APPENDIX 1: VIRTUAL CONFERENCE AGENDA 11

DAY ONE 11 OPENING PLENARY ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. CONCURRENT SESSIONS ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. CONCURRENT SESSIONS ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

DAY TWO 12 PLENARY ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. CONCURRENT SESSIONS ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. OPEN SPACE SESSION 13

DAY THREE 13 CONCURRENT SESSIONS 13 NETWORKING SESSION (TIME TO CONNECT WITH COLLEAGUES IN SMALL GROUPS) 14 CONCURRENT SESSIONS 14 CLOSING PLENARY 14

APPENDIX 2: LIST OF KIIS 15 INTRODUCTION 15 KIIS 15

APPENDIX 3: CONFERENCE EVALUATION SURVEY AND RESULTS 16

USAID.GOV ASIA PACIFIC DRG VIRTUAL CONFERENCE FINAL REPORT | IV

ACRONYMS AAFS Agency Approach to Field Support

COR Contracting Officer Representative

COT Conference Organization Team

DRG Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance

FSN Foreign Service National

FSO Foreign Service Officer

KII Key informant interview

LER Learning, Evaluation, and Research

PRC People’s Republic of China

RDMA Regional Development Mission for Asia

USAID United States Agency for International Development

USG United States Government

USAID.GOV ASIA PACIFIC DRG VIRTUAL CONFERENCE FINAL REPORT | 1

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Nepal, Regional Development Mission for Asia (RDMA), the Asia Bureau, and the Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance (DRG) Center commissioned the Cloudburst Group (Cloudburst) to design and implement a three-day virtual conference to identify opportunities for engagement through COVID-19-related programmatic adaptation, and to discuss both democratic backsliding and the resilience demonstrated against it as a result of the effects of COVID-19. The Asia Pacific DRG Virtual Conference (the Conference) was designed to accomplish the following objectives:

1. increase USAID DRG staff knowledge of approaches to successfully strengthen DRG-related programs in relation to the coronavirus pandemic, highlighting democratic backsliding, and China as a strategic competitor; and

2. build professional networks and nurture cross-Mission cohesion in the absence of opportunities for in-person meetings, training, and other DRG-related events.

CONFERENCE APPROACH Cloudburst worked collaboratively with USAID’s Conference Organization Team (COT) to develop and execute the Conference. The COT included five USAID staff members representing the DRG Center, the Asia Bureau, USAID’s Nepal Mission, and USAID’s Regional Development Mission in Asia (RDMA). Conference preparation began by soliciting the needs and opinions of potential Conference participants through an online survey and 19 key informant interviews (KIIs). Participants in pre-Conference research were asked what the most important thing would be to address in the Conference and if there were lessons to glean from other recent virtual conferences, and then they were asked to generate ideas for specific sessions and speakers. Key informants were selected by purposeful sampling based on an understanding of the Asia region, democracy issues, COVID-19 adaptations, and professional development processes for USAID staff. The online survey was sent to USAID staff members from the Asia Bureau and USAID Missions in Asia and the Pacific, and 67 replied. The KIIs served to probe survey results; gauge potential differences among Foreign Service Nationals (FSNs), Foreign Service Officers (FSOs), and other categories of USAID staff, and enrich understanding of the topics to address.

Based on the KIIs and survey responses, Cloudburst and the COT designed a flexible agenda, allowing Conference participants to attend plenary sessions, panels, and breakout sessions along three programming tracks: 1) Democracy Issues; 2) COVID-19 Adaptations; and 3) Professional Development. The final agenda can be found in Appendix 1.

The Conference was held from 6:30 to 9:30am EDT, May 18-20, 2021, and was attended by FSOs, FSNs, and other USAID staff in the Asia Bureau and DRG Center from Missions across the Asia and Pacific regions. It consisted of 18 sessions and was attended by more than 100 participants each day. Participant feedback after the Conference suggested that while the time was intended to cater to people in the Asia and Pacific time zones, it was still challenging for staff to attend at the allotted time. Average attendance per day varied, with Tuesday having the most attendance (up to 144 attendees during the first concurrent sessions). On Wednesday, attendance peaked during the plenary on democratic backsliding, with 103 attendees. On Thursday, 118 attendees joined the first concurrent sessions. The session with the highest attendance was the opening plenary, "Vision for Asia and the DRG" with keynote speaker Karen Freeman, Acting Assistant Administrator for Bureau for Asia, which had 111 attendees.


VIRTUAL WHOVA PLATFORM

Choosing a conference platform was a critical planning decision. Google Meet is the online/virtual meeting platform of choice for USAID and has the advantage of being known and widely used by staff. However, in a conference setting, Google Meet disadvantages include a lack of ability to spotlight panelists, limited Q&A tools, and a difficulty in distinguishing the Conference from any number of other internal meetings. To address these issues, the organizers selected the Whova1 platform for its ability to create a sense of place; for several features the platform seemed to offer to promote engagement opportunities, start instant conversations with colleagues, and facilitate networking; and because it was an easier way to communicate directly with participants. Challenges ranged from a learning curve for users and speakers to more technical limitations such as an inability to launch non-randomized breakouts from within a session. Reactions and feedback on Whova were mixed—about the same number of participants commented that the platform created challenges as said they enjoyed it and preferred it. Overall, survey respondents indicated a strong preference for having any future iterations of the Conference in-person rather than virtually.

ADMINISTRATION

USAID led outreach to possible speakers, with support from Cloudburst. Speaker outreach began by filtering suggestions from the initial survey and KIIs and directly soliciting colleagues with known expertise. Cloudburst accumulated the speakers’ presentation materials and ensured that speakers were entered into Whova to access Whova’s Speaker Center and features. Cloudburst oversaw speaker support with guidance and run-throughs, which mainly occurred the week prior to the Conference and included testing technical equipment and connectivity and demonstrating Whova’s engagement features such as Q&A and polling. Cloudburst also facilitated sessions, assigning leads and producers to each in order to organize and troubleshoot any technical issues during the session. In addition to three primary Cloudburst organizers, three Cloudburst session producers were available the days of the Conference to lead the technical aspects of sessions, troubleshoot if necessary, and support speakers through sharing slides, monitoring sessions’ chats and Q&As, and opening session “rooms” in advance. This role was initially envisioned to also include Conference notes but note-taking was impossible to balance with other these responsibilities and was replaced by recording. Breakout rooms created the biggest logistical challenges, requiring, producers and other staff to manage the breakouts and support transitions between the main session and the breakouts.

ENGAGEMENT

Given the challenges of engaging with participants in a virtual setting, Conference organizers took extra care to consider adult learning behaviors and appropriate engagement strategies. One session, Open Space, was designed specifically to elicit topics of interest by participants and encourage them to lead their own discussions about the topic’s relevance and crowdsource other experiences with the topic. In an in-

1 This platform was chosen with the understanding that Cloudburst’s engagement of Whova, the external service provider, kept the organizers in compliance with USAID’s purchasing rules. Over subsequent weeks, USAID has received direction that the compliance issue is related to USAID staff creating an account with their email address; therefore, the Whova app is noncompliant as all participants and speakers had to register/buy a ticket in Whova (even if it was free).


person Open Space session, participants generate session topics in real time. Based on feedback from other virtual conference organizers who had also used Open Space, the Conference organizers chose a more structured approach, soliciting topics via survey in advance, generating instructions and discussion questions, and creating a template to capture notes, actions, and insights. The Open Space session was attended by 58 participants and included four participant-led breakout discussions on the following topics:

● How can we effectively operate governance activities in authoritarian countries?

● What does the President’s Executive Memo and USAID’s Policy on Promoting the Rights of Indigenous Peoples mean for you?

● What can we do to maintain good relationships when USAID events are covered negatively by opposition media?

● What trends, dynamics, responses are we seeing for Buddhist extremism? (e.g., Burma, Sri Lanka, Thailand)

The Open Space session received mixed reviews. On the final post-Conference evaluation, it was ranked “good” on average, but on the second day’s feedback survey, it was listed by 28 percent of respondents as their favorite part of the day (5 out of 18 responses).

Pre-Conference research identified networking as a high priority for the Conference. Three networking sessions were initially on the agenda, but scheduling limitations reduced the number to one. Unfortunately, the most significant technical glitch of the Conference involved the “Networking Tables,” an add-on feature of Whova, which was supposed to automatically sort all attendees into groups with three other participants for five minutes, and then automatically advance participants to the next round (with three rounds total). Whova’s feature failed, but the Cloudburst producers were able to loosely replicate the experience by implementing a quick series of randomly sorted Zoom breakouts. Even though only a handful of participants attended that session, Conference feedback reflected an interest in more networking in future events. Ideas for future events include an open, unmoderated “room” available during all Conference hours (to replicate a lobby in a conference hall), and open networking sessions to take place at the end of the first and second days, either with or without discussion prompts (to roughly simulate an open end-of-day coffee or cocktails session).

OBSERVATIONS AND INSIGHTS

DEMOCRACY ISSUES CONFERENCE TRACK

The democracy issues Conference track emerged from feedback from survey respondents and KIIs, which identified a need to discuss the multiple threats to democracy globally. The goal of the track was to highlight the status of and resources for USAID Missions in Asia and the Pacific around topics such as the trend toward authoritarianism, the role of disinformation and misinformation, and the status of civil society. Five panels and one plenary addressed democracy issues. Below is a summary of the track by session with attendance.


TABLE 1: DEMOCRACY ISSUES TRACK SUMMARY

SESSION TYPE SESSION TOPIC ATTENDANCE

Plenary Democratic Backsliding and Opportunities 103

Moderated Panel Responding to Resurgent Authoritarianism 99

Panel with Breakouts The State of Civil Society: COVID-19 Impacts and Implications

93

Moderated Panel Disinformation and Misinformation 63

Moderated Panel New Resources for Meeting Today’s Elections Challenges 46

Moderated Panel Nonviolent Methods for Keeping and Expanding Civic Spaces 31

DEMOCRACY ISSUES—INSIGHTS

Overall, the democracy issues track was well attended and highly reviewed, and it featured four of the five best-attended sessions.

The democracy issues track provided a forum to explore whether/how USAID approaches to democracy issues within the global and regional context are responsive to emerging challenges:

“We see that the DRG sector is very dynamic with new trends of authoritarianism and illiberal states. Our traditional approaches need to be additionally improved. We need to be better prepared for the new challenges.”

The USAID colleagues shared and discussed diverse resources across these presentations, including:

● Electoral Assessment Framework

● Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Pandemic Backsliding Project

● Political Party Assistance Policy

● USAID’s Disinformation Primer

● Countering Disinformation Guide

● Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) Democracy Index

● CIVICUS Civic Space Monitor

● ATARI Assessment Tool

● Greater Internet Freedom (GIF)

● Digital Apex (ITR/T)

● DRG Center Mechanisms for Civil Society, Human Rights, Governance, Consortium for Elections, and Political Process Strengthening (CEPPS), etc.

● Countering PRC Malign Influence Fund (CPMIF) formerly CCIF

● USAID Indo-Pacific Framework


Of particular interest in this track was the issue of strategic competition in the region with the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Panelists asserted that countries in the region do not want to choose sides but prefer to seek a balance between the US and the PRC.

In the plenary sessions, USAID leaders reiterated the message in President Biden’s Interim National Security Strategic Guidance that states, “We must now demonstrate—with a clarity that dispels any doubt—that democracy can still deliver for our people and for people around the world. We must prove that our model isn’t a relic of history; it’s the single best way to realize the promise of our future.” But he also cautioned to do so with humility: we do not have all the answers and must create partnerships and be open to new ideas and solutions. President Biden also emphasized the deep connection of the US to the countries in the Indo-Pacific. The USAID Administrator, Samantha Power, has stated that strengthening DRG is one of the Agency’s four priorities (along with addressing the pandemic, climate change, and conflict & stabilization). Acting Asia Bureau Assistant Administrator Freeman also acknowledged that authoritarianism, corruption, human rights, and gender are additional themes felt acutely in the Asia-Pacific region at this time.

Efforts to combat authoritarianism were also of particular interest to USAID colleagues in Asia and the Pacific. Participants lauded Conference discussions around nonviolent methods in the post-Conference survey. USAID has not traditionally supported protests due to the perception that it undermines government authority, but civil society is increasingly relying upon protests and other nonviolent methods to meet new challenges in human rights and counter authoritarianism.

Suggestions for how to improve the utility of the democracy issues track centered on providing space for deeper discussion and analysis of the secondary data on DRG trends that is available to officers. Post-Conference evaluation survey results indicated a thirst for more expertise outside of USAID, reflected by this survey response:

“Provide more time for plenary sessions and discussion with experts. Everything was too short, there was not much time for real discussions. While it was good to give a chance to many FSNs to share their experience, I think that we need deeper analytical knowledge and experts that could help us to think outside of traditional USAID thinking instead of just sharing what we all do, which often is very similar across various missions.”

COVID-19 ADAPTATIONS CONFERENCE TRACK

The coronavirus pandemic was a main driver for the Conference, because of how it affected both programming and the ability to convene. Conference organizers had originally anticipated a high demand for COVID-19-related sessions, but survey responses and KIIs showed less demand than they had expected. It’s difficult to say why initial enthusiasm for sharing and understanding Covid-19 adaptation by missions did not translate to better attendance compared to the democracy issues track.


TABLE 2: COVID-19 TRACK SUMMARY


Moderated Panel USAID Missions' Resilience and Adaptations to COVID-19 42

Moderated Panel Governance and Health Systems Strengthening 27

Moderated Panel Gender-Based Violence and the Pandemic 41

Moderated Panel Extremism, Conflict Mitigation, and Social Cohesion 47

COVID-19 ADAPTATIONS—INSIGHTS

The best attended COVID-19 session was the Extremism, Conflict Mitigation, and Social Cohesion session on the third day. Panelists addressed social cohesion, resilience, and strategies for peacebuilding with examples from Sri Lanka, Pakistan, and Indonesia, as well as a regional perspective. Topics included the marginalization of vulnerable populations, ultranationalism, hate speech, and supporting women, youth, and peacebuilders. Key learnings are that social cohesion and reconciliation mean different things to different communities and there are additional contexts to understand in each geography. The rise of the Black Lives Matter movement in the US has had ripple effects across the world, including in the Indonesian province of Papua. In Pakistan, interventions that countered violent extremism were successfully incorporated into COVID-19 assistance and programming. Across the board, Missions adapted support and programming with virtual tools to keep driving efforts despite the numerous obstacles that the pandemic presented.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE TRACK

The professional development track was the least attended track on average. Nevertheless, the post-Conference evaluation indicated that participants valued learning from and networking with colleagues from other Missions.

TABLE 3: PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT TRACK SUMMARY


Plenary Closing Plenary: Moving Forward with Vision, Knowledge, and Community

62

Panel with Breakouts USAID Roles and Core Competencies for Professional Development

40

Panel with Breakouts Working across Missions: FSNs Share Successful Examples of Collaboration

40

Moderated Panel Rebuilding the DRG Cadre (Future of Backstop 76) 37

Workshop Staff Resilience and Adaptation 13

Networking Networking 36


PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT—INSIGHTS

The sessions in this track were envisioned to provide resources to USAID staff across hiring mechanisms and enable them to take stock of opportunities within their hiring mechanisms, focus on resilience in the midst of challenging work contexts, and connect with colleagues.

One of the most interactive sessions of the Conference was Working Across Missions, in which four panelists represented a wide variety of their own experiences and identified some of the biggest challenges and opportunities for improvement.

The FSN session, which is being built upon at the upcoming Global DRG Conference, generated tangible actions to consider, including:

● develop and maintain a roster of opportunities that those in need of support can add to and FSNs can review;

● add announcements for possible fellowship opportunities, TDY opportunities, and other experiences to the various newsletters that FSNs receive on a regular basis;

● expand on the currently nascent database of expertise and skills across the region (and the Agency), allowing others to identify FSNs to engage in TDYs in response to specific needs;

● add a TDY plan to the existing use of a training plan or other plans as part of regular performance reviews and professional development plans; and

● have FSOs join and support FSNs in TDYs and exchange opportunities. The two roles are very complementary, and the combinations will also increase accessibility for FSNs who often have smaller networks within the Agency to hear about opportunities.

Foreign Service Officers also partook in sessions addressing the future of the Backstop 76 Cadre and what is on the horizon for meeting growing needs in DRG efforts.

The organizers tried to develop accessible and relevant sessions for staff under all other hiring mechanisms. The Staff Care team was invited to present a session on stress management and resilience, and ended up modeling their techniques when confronted repeatedly by technical difficulties.

In addition to the abovementioned sessions and networking opportunities, the Whova platform provided other ways for participants to connect directly with each other, including through participant profiles, private video chats and messaging, and discussion boards. Some attendees made use of these extra features, but most limited their use of the Whova platform to the more typical business of attending virtual conference sessions: watching the video, commenting in the concurrent comment threads associated with each session, and engaging in session Q&As.

RECOMMENDATIONS

POSSIBLE TRAINING TOPICS

Conference discussions and the post-Conference feedback survey identified several potential opportunities for training:


● Non-violent protest: The Conference seemed to energize many participants to think more deeply about how to counter resurgent authoritarianism, democratic backsliding, and disinformation and misinformation campaigns. One topic mentioned by multiple participants was how to support and encourage non-violent protest among civil society.

● Electoral Assessment Framework: After Michael McNulty and his colleagues presented the Electoral Assessment Framework, some attendees expressed an interest in further training on the process and perhaps receiving more specific technical support for conducting electoral assessments.

● Training from outside experts on various topics: After attending sessions that included research presented by external researchers such as V-Dem and International IDEA, participants expressed interest in further exposure to knowledge from outside of USAID.

BUILDING NETWORKS/COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE

One of the identified needs for and desired outcomes of the Conference is the ability to develop and maintain communication and collaboration among DRG practitioners across the region. USAID has had significant experience and success forming communities of practice around specific topics and themes, including for instance such relevant topics as Thinking and Working Politically.

Other ways suggested to keep DRG staff in the Asia and Pacific regions connected include some active listservs that can perhaps be expanded upon. A number of new or planned databases and initiatives for coordination and collaboration, including under the Agency Approach to Field Support (AAFS), can be supported or leveraged. Several sessions and post-Conference feedback also expressed interest in creating a database that gives staff the ability to draw on expertise within the cadre, including (or even especially) that of FSNs.

ONGOING CHALLENGES

Feedback from participants during sessions and in the post-Conference survey highlights some ongoing support needs and expectations that Mission staff have of their headquarters colleagues in the Asia Bureau and the DRG Center. Some comments stated that support from DC is currently quite valuable and responsive, so many of the needs are related to continuing or expanding upon existing support. The most crucial support identified includes:

● Advocacy with Agency leadership: This was particularly important given the participation of so many high-level Agency representatives and the interest in learning about the priorities of the new Administration. This also echoes some of the above observations and below lessons learned relating to more opportunities for Mission staff to provide input to Agency leadership.

● Technical support and resources: For some Mission-based participants, this Conference brought to light existing knowledge and materials that can be extremely helpful to their work. Much of that knowledge is available at headquarters or, at a minimum, can be made available by headquarters colleagues.

● Connections to subject-matter experts: Again echoing several other recommendations, participants vocalized a need to consolidate and make accessible the subject-matter experts throughout the Agency (or even outside of the Agency) who can be brought in as a resource. This also includes expertise outside of the DRG technical area and outside of the Asia and Pacific


regions, recognizing that cross-sectoral knowledge and innovation in other parts of the world can be beneficial to DRG programming in Asia and the Pacific.

PROCESS IMPROVEMENT AND LESSONS LEARNED This portion of the report is a list of lessons learned from the planning and process of the Conference. It is not exhaustive but could serve as a useful guide for other virtual conferences. Lessons learned are broken down across four major themes: General, Planning, Execution, and Technology.

GENERAL

● The virtual conference was attended by more field staff than would typically have attended an in-person conference in Washington, DC. USAID shared that, on average, only around 30 FSNs and FSOs would be able to attend an in-person DRG conference; Cloudburst does not know the exact number of attendees at a typical in-person conference, but USAID organizers estimated the attendance of this virtual conference to be double the in-person attendance.

● The division of tasks across USAID and the consultant worked out well for speaker outreach and coordination; it helped that USAID could identify potential speakers and manage the initial conversations. The pass-off of the speakers to Cloudburst could have been smoother and an extra week or two would have ensured more practice on the platform, more continuity across presentations, more participant preparation, and the ability to share guides and set the expectations of participants.

● Many people were eager to engage as speakers and panelists. Future conferences should continue to solicit speakers from different backgrounds and levels to hear from new and emerging voices.

PLANNING

● Pre-conference surveys and KIIs were a successful tool for creating demand-driven, customized content that added value for participants. This should be a part of future conference planning.

● Set aside time to ensure the quality of the platform and test all links, including access to shared documents.

● Ensure that invitations are sent to individual email addresses for systems that associate email addresses with registration (instead of sending to list servs).

● In order to maintain planning flexibility, the decision to commit to the Whova platform was taken late in the planning process. The team didn’t engage Whova until April 28, leaving less than three weeks to learn its use and take advantage of its features. More time would have allowed the team to take advantage of some of the other features Whova has to offer, including asynchronous networking and discussion boards, and would have decoupled the platform learning curve and the inevitable challenges of the last weeks of event planning.

● Technical run-throughs of each session proved invaluable in working out technical issues before the event. However, they are an extraordinary amount of work — each a coordination challenge of its own, spanning time zones and changing dynamically as speakers are changed or added. If technical run-throughs are planned, care should be taken to finalize the speaker rosters before the run-throughs. It may also be advisable to assign a staff member who is not responsible for planning


of the event itself to implementation of the technical run-throughs — as if they themselves are a separate events that needs planning.

EXECUTION

● In concurrent sessions, the Conference allotted five minutes for most panelists, an inadequate length for most to explore their topics in depth. Planning for seven to 10 minutes per speaker would create better depth and protect Q&As from being sacrificed when speakers went over time.

● Similarly, having enough preparation time to do timed practice with speakers (as opposed to technical run-throughs) may have helped speakers keep to time and allow more Q&A.

● Networking sessions would benefit from prompts, small groups (no more than four people), and longer time to talk (7–10 minutes).

● Some conference activities could have been asynchronous, such as sending pre-recorded addresses instead of live plenaries without Q&A or adding discussion boards or galleries for participants to peruse.

● Participants and topic leaders would have benefited from more illustration and preparation for how the Open Spaces session would work. This should be built into future conferences.

● Polls were a good way to engage and encourage discussion.

● Clear methods for internal communication among moderators, speakers, and producers are critical for smooth execution during sessions. The COT used WhatsApp to communicate time checks for speakers and address questions with the organizers without it occurring in the session.

● The prominent chat window provided by Whova turned out to be a crucial, or perhaps the crucial, community-building element of the platform. Any virtual conference platform should consider including a prominent concurrent chat window alongside video presentations in order to involve all participants in respectful, collegial conversation.

TECHNOLOGY

● If using a new tech platform, have some productive/valuable pre-conference assignments that can get people accustomed to it, such as completing their profile or signing up for sessions.

● Recording sessions allows participants to go back and watch sessions that they were not able to attend during the actual Conference and maximize content-sharing.

● If there are multiple PowerPoints in a single session, combine them into a single file and in the correct order for easier screen sharing.

● Including waiting rooms and/or background music for participants as they wait for sessions to start could improve the user experience.


APPENDIX 1: VIRTUAL CONFERENCE AGENDA Tuesday May 18, Wednesday May 19, and Thursday May 20, 2021 • 6:30 AM – 9:30 AM EDT

DAY ONE

6:30–7:20AM EDT – OPENING PLENARY

Opening Remarks from Karen Freeman, Acting Assistant Administrator for Bureau for Asia: Vision for Asia and the DRG

7:30–8:20AM EDT – CONCURRENT SESSIONS

DEMOCRACY ISSUES COVID-19 ADAPTATIONS

Responding to Resurgent Authoritarianism

Moderated Panel

• Tom White, Democracy Advisor (Moderator)

• Nikole Burroughs, Deputy Assistant Administrator PPL

• Julia Kennedy, Deputy India Pacific Coordinator for South Asia

• Cristina Olive, Senior Coordinator, Indo-Pacific Hub for East Asia and the Pacific

• Nils Mueller, Countering Authoritarianism Team Leader

USAID Missions’ Resilience and Adaptations to COVID-19

Moderated Panel

• David Isaak, Deputy Director, Democracy and Governance Office, USAID Nepal (Moderator)

• Michael Buehler, Associate Professor in Comparative Politics

• Tinaflor Chaingam, Project Management Specialist, RDMA

• Socheata Vong, Project Management Specialist, USAID Cambodia

• Dana Beegun, Director, Democracy and Governance Office USAID Uzbekistan

8:30–9:20AM EDT

DEMOCRACY ISSUES COVID-19 ADAPTATIONS

The State of Civil Society: COVID-19 Impact and Implications

Presentation and Breakouts

• Mariam Afrasiabi, Civil Society and Media (CSM) Team Lead (Moderator)

Innovation for Change Panelists:

• Jamila Asanova, Regional Hub Manager Central Asia

• Arzak Khan, Regional Hub Manager South Asia

Governance and Health Systems Strengthening

Moderated Panel

• Matt Henneberger, Health Systems Advisor (Moderator)

• Jean-Jacques Frere, Senior Governance Advisor

• Pushpita Samina, Clinical Services Lead, Office of Population, Health, Nutrition and Education


• Corinna Lopa, Programme Director East Asia

• Harry Olikwailafa, Pacific Hub Board Member and Vice Chair of Pacific Youth Council

• Lopa Basu, Senior HIV & TB Technical Advisor, Michael O’Leary, Senior Infectious Diseases Advisor

DAY TWO

6:30–7:20AM EDT – PLENARY

Democratic Backsliding and Opportunities

● Remarks from Don Chisholm, Acting Director, Center for Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance, USAID

● Jean Lachapelle, Research Fellow, Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Institute, University of Gothenburg; and

● Annika Silva-Leander, Senior Programme Manager, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA)

7:30–8:20AM EDT – CONCURRENT SESSIONS

DEMOCRACY ISSUES COVID-19 ADAPTATIONS PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Disinformation and Misinformation

Moderated Panel

• Josh Machleder, Senior Media Advisor/DRG Center (Moderator)

• Gerardo Porta, Sr. Democracy, Rights and Governance Specialist

• Dondy Sentya, Sr. Rule of Law and Government Relations Advisor at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)/Indonesia

• Erkin Konurbaev, Project Management Specialist, DGO Office, Kyrgyz Republic

Gender-Based Violence and the Pandemic

Moderated Panel

• Kate Bollinger, Acting Division Chief | Senior Gender Advisor (Moderator)

• Irene Ramatala, Project Management Specialist, Gender Office

• Mahmuda Rahman Khan, Senior Program Development Specialist/Gender Advisor

• Sopheap Sreng, Project Design and Gender Specialist

USAID Roles and Core Competencies for Professional Development

Speakers and Breakouts

• Blair King, Democracy Officer, Evidence and Learning (E&L) Team (Moderator)

• Miles Toder, Democracy Officer

• Mark Parkison, Assignments and Career Counselor, Backstop 76

• Sharon Carter, Acting DRG Center Office Director

• Ria Orca, Democracy & Governance Specialist

• Reshma Thapa, Democracy and Governance Specialist

• Angelina Hermon, Program Management Specialist


OPEN SPACE SESSION

8:30–9:20AM EDT

Open Space is a meeting technique where participants are invited to share or facilitate discussions on topics of their choosing. If there is an idea or topic you want to discuss that is not elsewhere on the agenda, suggest it for the Open Space session and become the session leader. No preparation is required—the work is done through the discussion itself! There is no need to be a subject-matter expert either; the point is a productive dialogue.

DAY THREE

CONCURRENT SESSIONS

DEMOCRACY ISSUES COVID-19 ADAPTATIONS DEMOCRACY ISSUES

New Resources for Meeting Today’s Elections Challenges

Moderated Panel • Taly Lind, Senior Advisor,

Elections and Political Transitions Division, DRG Center (Moderator)

• Michael McNulty, Senior Advisor, Democratic Elections and Political Processes

• Renne Traicova, Senior Field Advisor

• Caroline Sahley, Democracy Specialist

• Ramesh Adhikari, Elections, Legislative and Political Process Specialist

Extremism, Conflict Mitigation and Social Cohesion

Moderated Panel

• Kaley Nash, CVE Advisor (Moderator)

• Maureen Laisang, Program Management Specialist

• Sohaib Khan, Development Assistance Specialist

• Preeyanat Phanayanggoor, Regional Program Development Specialist

• Ivan Rasiah, Project Management Specialist

Nonviolent Methods for Keeping and Expanding Civic Spaces

Moderated Panel

• Linnea Beatty, Democracy, Governance, Peace and Security Advisor (Moderator)

• Michael Beer, Director, Nonviolence International | Author of Civil Resistance Tactics in the 21st Century

• Janjira Sobatpoonsiri, Assistant Professor Institute of Asian Studies, Chulalongkorn University | Research Fellow German Institute of Global and Area Studies


NETWORKING SESSION (TIME TO CONNECT WITH COLLEAGUES IN SMALL GROUPS)

7:20–7:50AM EDT

CONCURRENT SESSIONS

7:50–8:40AM EDT

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR FSNS

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR FSOS

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR EVERYONE

Working across Missions: FSNs Share Successful Examples of Collaboration

Moderated Panel and Discussion

• Shahnaz Zakaria, Senior Food Security & Disaster Management Advisor (Moderator)

• Maryam Mohmand, Project Management Specialist (Moderator)

• Habiba Akter, Team Lead - Human Rights and Rule of Law

• Sereisatya Ros, Education Project Management Specialist

• Phetviengkhone Sayasane, Project Management Specialist

Rebuilding the DRG Cadre (Future of Backstop 76)

Speaker and Breakouts

• Blair King, Democracy Officer, Evidence and Learning (E&L) Team (Moderator)

• Miles Toder, Democracy Officer

• Mark Parkison, Assignments and Career Counselor, Backstop 76

• Sharon Carter, Acting DRG Center Office Director

Staff Resilience and Adaptation

Workshop

• Tabitha Mann, Staff Care Clinical Team Lead

• Sharon Forrence, Training Advisor

CLOSING PLENARY

8:40–9:10AM EDT

Closing Remarks from Anjali Kaur, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Bureau for Asia: Moving Forward with Vision, Knowledge, and Community.


APPENDIX 2: LIST OF KIIS

INTRODUCTION

Dear XX, I am XX, and I am on a planning team for an upcoming DRG Asia Pacific regional conference. Our goal is to share knowledge and experiences related to programming DRG activities during COVID-19 and to strengthen our community of USAID Asia Pacific DRG professionals. Today I am joined by a representative of Cloudburst, XX, who is joining our conversation to capture notes as the Cloudburst team is organizing the conference on behalf of the DRG Asia Pacific regional team. Thank you in advance for your feedback and participation. We anticipate the Conference to be in early to mid-May and we anticipate it to include up to 100 Foreign Service Officers (FSOs), Foreign Service Nationals (FSNs) and USAID staff in the Asia Bureau and DRG Center. The conference will accommodate participants in three known time zones, UTC+5, UTC+6, and UTC+7 and it is anticipated that the conference days will be either in the morning or evening locally for these time zones. The purpose of this conversation is to better understand ways that the Conference can help identify opportunities for engagement related to programmatic adaptations from COVID-19, and to discuss both democratic backsliding and the resilience demonstrated against it as a result of the effects of COVID-19. We will ask you several semi-structured questions to better understand ways to structure the conference and meet our goals.

KIIS

1. What is the single most important thing you would like to see this conference achieve and why?

2. The Conference Planning team is prioritizing participation, and knowledge-sharing around programmatic adaptations or challenges, and finally for professional development - does this overall approach make sense? Is there something missing?

3. What programmatic topics do you see as the most relevant to this conference in your country and in the greater region? Why?

4. What professional development topics do you think the DRG cadre will see as the most relevant to this conference and why? (for example, networking)

5. The conference is tentatively slated for early to mid-May. Are you aware of upcoming events in the timeframe for the conference that we should consider planning around?

6. What virtual/remote format for the conference do you think would be the most engaging and why? - Have you been in any exciting virtual/remote experiences? What made them so? - Do you know of any technological limitations we may encounter? - What has NOT worked well?

7. Who would you like to see present at the conference? - Can you make any recommendations? - Can you think of examples to share with panelists as they prepare?

8. Other thoughts you’d like to discuss?


APPENDIX 3: CONFERENCE EVALUATION SURVEY AND RESULTS Overall response rate = 43* (not all responded to all questions, however)

1. OVERALL, ON A SCALE OF 1-5, HOW WOULD YOU RATE THE QUALITY OF THE CONFERENCE?

2. HOW WOULD YOU RATE THE QUALITY OF THE CONFERENCE SPEAKERS?


3. HOW WOULD YOU RATE THE QUALITY OF THE DISCUSSION?

4. HOW WOULD YOU RATE THE VALUE OF THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF CONFERENCE SESSIONS?

5. TO WHAT EXTENT WAS THE INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION FROM THE CONFERENCE USEFUL FOR YOUR WORK?


6. WHAT IS ONE THING THAT YOU LEARNED AT THE CONFERENCE THAT YOU WILL USE IN YOUR WORK?

Similar experience and practices FSN is very important to the agency and investing in FSN is one of the top priority for the agency, which includes TDY and training. Lessons to take forward for CVE programming how to tackle with mid/dis information GBV programming, new Backstop planning USAID's approach, besides programming, to support civic space. Network in other missions on similar DRG issues Use of various methodologies which were used during unique condition of pandemic. Non-violent protest. NA DRG Resources Nuanced discussion of China's influence, agenda and impact in the region Working in authoritarian spaces Better understanding of Biden administration perspectives in DRG Usage of alternate tools during a pandemic situations. Election Assessment framework Difficult to answer as I did not attend all the sessions The way that we can think about the future DRG activities based on emerging trends. I learned more about the USAID disinformation primer, and I will share this with colleagues across Missions as we move forward with programming on this issue. Networks and connections made during the conference. Electoral Assessment Framework piloted in Nepal was good leaning. Approach to disinformation programming Networking and getting to know other DG colleagues Lessons learned: CSO and governance Promote democratic space for civil society and FSN Council work Sharing issues from other Missions and ways to address them. Closing space tools

7. HOW WILL YOU USE THIS IN YOUR WORK MOVING FORWARD?

Keep the contact Pleanary session provoked me to think in a different way about our approaches. I would advocate for more investment in FSN at my mission. As the CVE Advisor it is relevant to my work. integrated learning in to programs i will be better able to connect to new DGHA colleagues.


Donor coordination, joint advocacy, and constant support to CSOs to stand up to shrinking civic space. Get to learn on experiences of similar projects/ activities By sharing/discussion with colleagues and partners. I will refer to website of the Nonviolence International and look for ideas. NA Its a significant consideration in project and activity design and in advising FO Utilize new resources and networks Shaping future work I lead Sharing with colleagues and IP. by reading the docs deeply, analyzing its contents and applying of them in our programs I always advocate foe HR and prevention of GBV Use evidence-based study to adjust interventions in response to emerging trends. See the answer to number 6. i will stay in touch with them and learn from the regional colleages. Will use the electoral assessment framework I will use it in the current activity, after the discussion with the IP Continue to use network and reach out for information sharing Incorporate lessons learned in our new CSO activity design Part of activity management I will try to apply different solutions depending on nature of issues Watch out the pace of shrinking space

8. WHAT SUPPORT FROM THE ASIA BUREAU AND/OR THE DRG CENTER WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR YOU TO ACT ON WHAT YOU'VE LEARNED FROM THE CONFERENCE?

Keep all of us connected It would be good to provide additional training with leading expers. We see that DRG sector is very dinamic with new trends of authoritarianism and illiberal states. Our traditional approaches need to be additionaly improved. We need to be better prepared for the new challenges. Studies presented by V-Dem institute were good but to short to think about new approaches. V-Dem has also some predictive analysis, it would be great to hear more about these and how to apply them in DRG sector to reduce risks of conflict, or improve prospects for peaceful transition of power. Be our voice with the agency leadership in DC. More risk-taking from Asia Bureau leadership regular sharing Please add me to the BS 76 list! Technical support The report of the event along with presentations stuff of speakers. Will be good to have separate session on how to develop, plan, and execute non-violent protest/advocacy. Continuing to inform/update us on relevant technical resources, training and events. Including identifying subject matter resource persons/experts who can be consulted or tapped.


Not sure Keep involve/engage us by sharing new learning and avenues. Have not thought about it yet Please keep the Missions posted on updated DRG policies and good studies. The support I receive now is great. How the Electoral Assessment Framework to dig out the country context and come up a sets of recommendations for the mission to design new activity. Keep the contact list and refer the mission to support needed None at the moment, the DRG team is responsive and share resources timely. Cross-sectoral advice Understanding that things are not easy here in Turkmenistan where dictatorship is ruling.

9. WAS THE LENGTH OF THE CONFERENCE ADEQUATE?

10. HOW WOULD YOU RATE THE OVERALL CONFERENCE ORGANIZATION AND COMMUNICATION?


11. HOW WOULD YOU RATE YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH THE CONFERENCE’S VIRTUAL PLATFORM?

12. WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE CHANGED ABOUT THE CONFERENCE?

N/A Timing of the conference was not the most convenient for those in East Asia, although absolutely understandable given the need to accommodate all time zones. NA Less parallel sessions Provide more time for plenary sessions and discussion with experts. Everything was to short, there was not much time for real discussions. While it was good to give a chance to many FSNs to share their experience, I think that we need deeper analythical knowledge and experts that could help us to think outside of traditional USAID thinking instead of just sharing what we all do, which often is very similar across various missions. Probably allocate additional one hour for each day as there was not much time for discussion during the breakout and open space report out sessions. Fewer emails from Whova more alignment with Asia time zone More time for networking More breakout sessions, where all participants could share their experiential learning. Would bring more think-tank, researchers and/or University professors to talk about relevant issues discussed in the conference. More time for breakout and networking as well as better communication how the virtual platform works. Too much time on speaker intros, and no time for Q&A was a poor choice. We could have read speaker CVs in advance. It was too late at night to have conversations/networking after the presentations. A full day of work, family, COVID lockdowns, too much.


More time for questions and discussion. Schedules were overlapping and discussion time often needed to be cut short In person More discussion, fewer topics, more of an actual Asia focus, more applied More inclusion of breakout sessions. Maybe having an opening on Day 3 instead of jumping right into the panels. I like Whova platform. Move it offline again Have this conducted in person Nothing come to mind n/a

13. HOW IS YOUR POSITION CATEGORIZED?

14. WHAT IS YOUR HIRING MECHANISM?

USAID Pacific DRG Virtual Conference Final Conference Report

Documents

Transcript of USAID Pacific DRG Virtual Conference Final Conference Report