International Lawyers Project
How do participants rate ILP’s anti-corruption sanctions trainings? Feedback from Nigerian NGOs
Updated: Oct 31, 2022
Approximately US$18 billion is lost yearly from corruption in Nigeria. The UK is one of the top three destinations worldwide for laundering the proceeds of corruption. ILP hosted a workshop on the UK Global Anti-Corruption Sanctions Regime for 21 Nigerian good governance activists including the Africa Network for Environment and Economic Justice (ANEEJ). These are the results of how they rank our trainings:
Level of Knowledge of the UK Global Anti-Corruption Sanctions Regime?
Before the workshop, 41% of participants rated their knowledge of the UK Sanctions Regime as ‘very poor’.
After the workshop, 46% of participants scored their understanding as excellent
Participant feedback: “The content of the ILP training workshop was very detailed and informative.”
Confidence in Making a Submission to the UK Global Anti-Corruption Sanctions Regime?
Before the workshop 73% of participants rated their confidence in making a submission at 0-5 out of 10.
After the workshop, 77% rated their confidence level at 7-10 out of 10, showing a substantial improvement in confidence.
Participant feedback: “Very impactful session.”
Quality of Expert legal Trainer selected?
91.7% of respondents rated ILP’s expert sanctions trainer, Oliver Windridge as ‘very good or excellent’.
Participant feedback: “The training is tailored to address capacity gaps in anti-corruption groups advocacy campaigns.”
Would participants recommend the training?
100% of participants replied that they would recommend the training to a colleague or peer.
When asked why the participants would recommend the training to a colleague, comments included:
“This is real capacity enhancement, everybody must know about it these anti-corruption tools.”
“ILP is delivering new knowledge to anti-corruption civil society that colleagues in this space aren't yet familiar with.”
Oliver Windridge, ILP’s expert trainer at the workshop.
When asked what the most valuable part of the session was, respondents stated:
“Every part of the session!”
“The sessions were all valuable but most important is the Q&A that threw more light on areas of poor understanding.”
Other comments on the training session included:
“I will recommend this training session should be repeated.”
“Well done. Waiting for the next session. Thank you.”
“Looking forward to a follow-up session that trains participants on how to develop submissions for identified persons of interest.”
“More explanation on the practicalities.”
“Please, keep up with the good work!”