Evaluation of the Southern and Eastern Africa Regional Centre for ...

10with and in a manner more pro-active for the marginalised sectors of society.Though there is no guarantee, the findings do show the indirect impact of morebeneficial interactions through the kinds of important legal and policy changes anddecision-making documented.There is clearly a major threat if funding arrangements alter. Scholarships, regionalteaching, top-up of SEARCWL salaries, and infrastructure maintenance would all bethreatened. Furthermore, the political and economic situation of Zimbabwecontinues to be uncertain in the run-up to elections in 2013. In effect, the fundinghas given the Centre a critical degree of autonomy, which makes them much lessdependent on the situation facing UoZ as a whole. That said, it is clear that fundingarrangements have precluded the need for exploring sustainability options.In conclusion, the SEARWCL has created solid foundations and an excellentproduct. Predictable long term funding has contributed greatly to these foundations.However, conversely, the solidity now requires a more dynamic response to tacklingprogrammatic assumptions and several areas identified here that might be improved.In spite of challenges to sustain funding this may well prove to be an occasion forinvigorating and exploring efforts for more innovatory means to establish the Centreas a genuine regional hub with a regional vision.RecommendationsThe SEARCWL should strengthen its profile and potential for impact:Academic and regional sustainabilityStrategic planning− The SEARCWL prioritise plans for its strategic vision (including a missionstatement for its website) and more strategic focus outside of the course itself,and also one that includes options for financial sustainability (see also underfinancial sustainability). The possibilities for outreach should be part of thestrategic planning, albeit with the understanding of possible trade-offs oradditional resource needs this may incur. Nonetheless, there should be morestructured discussion of the pros and cons of and contingencies for outreach.Regional collaboration− To encourage greater regional ownership, there should be an enhanced role forregional academic partners to co-supervise students from their sendingcountries. Furthermore, steps should be taken to explore a flag ship regionalresearch programme (not necessarily course-related).− The governing structure as a whole should be reassessed. One suggestion isthat it may be beneficial for someone from outside the University sector,perhaps with experience of regional research, dissemination and/or advocacyat a regional level, to be invited on to the board.− Steps to be taken to strengthen the Alumnae association. Though this processwould realistically need to be driven by Alumnae, it requires some facilitation,mentoring and support. SEARCWL, for example, could provide a country visitto be organised by Alumnae, perhaps an event once per year in a selectedcountry.