Series Evaluation Insights for Policy and Programming
Context
The Caribbean University Level Programme CULP was a regional higher education initiative funded under the sixth and seventh European Development Funds and implemented in Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados, and the Dominican Republic. It responded to structural development challenges in the Caribbean, including small and vulnerable island economies, significant brain drain, weak regional integration, and underinvestment in tertiary education. The programme aimed to strengthen human resource capacity for sustainable social and economic development while supporting the broader Caribbean Regional Indicative Programme focus on regional integration and cooperation.
CULP targeted public and private sector professionals from all CARIFORUM member states, with particular relevance for small island countries that had limited access to affordable, regionally relevant masters training. It sought to address language divides between English, Spanish, and French speaking Caribbean countries and to build a cadre of professionals with a distinct regional outlook in fields such as public sector management, natural resource management, agricultural diversification, architecture, cultural heritage, and international business.
Intervention Overview
CULP financed the design and delivery of seven masters programmes delivered by five universities in Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados, and the Dominican Republic, complemented by components on distance education, information systems, and later language training. Courses covered Economic Policies and Reform for Development, Public Sector Management, International Business, Agricultural Diversification, Natural Resource Management, Caribbean Tropical Architecture, and Monument and Cultural Heritage Conservation, combining academic training with regional seminars, internships, and field research.
The implementation model combined an ambitious regional co management structure with an initial external technical assistance contract managed from Europe and two Programme Management Units located in Jamaica and the Dominican Republic. The programme was intended as a process oriented intervention that would evolve through strategic planning and logical framework based monitoring, but in practice it operated largely as a time bound project with a strong course centred focus and limited adaptation of the original design. The core implementation period ran from the late nineteen nineties to mid two thousand three, followed by an ex post final evaluation mission in late two thousand four.
Evidence: What Worked
The programme exceeded its quantitative target of training three hundred fifty professionals by supporting four hundred five CULP scholars, with an additional estimated two hundred fee paying students participating in the courses. Graduates came from all CARIFORUM countries, and the likelihood of receiving a scholarship was particularly high in small island states such as Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Grenada, and Dominica, which would otherwise have had difficulty accessing advanced training. Most graduates were already employed and returned to relevant positions in the public or private sectors with upgraded skills, and there is no evidence of large scale post training emigration among scholarship holders.
Students consistently rated course quality as high and reported strong gains in professional skills and employment opportunities, with female graduates highlighted as particular beneficiaries. University departments reported institutional strengthening through new or redesigned masters curricula, acquisition of equipment and literature, staff development in innovative teaching and distance education methods, and in one case construction of a dedicated building for tropical architecture. The first ever structured academic exchange between English speaking Caribbean countries and the Spanish speaking Dominican Republic, including collaboration with Haitian students, was widely seen by participants as a major qualitative success that broadened regional understanding and intercultural competence.
Evidence: What Did Not Work
The regional integration objective was only partially achieved, as most universities concentrated on running their own courses rather than building a coherent regional human resource development system. Planned activities for regional cooperation such as twenty regional seminars, systematic joint research projects, and mutual recognition of qualifications were implemented only in a limited way, with only eight regional seminars held and little progress on credit transfer or common degree frameworks. The heavy regional governance structure of Academic Policy Board and Programme Implementation Group did not evolve into an effective forum for strategic planning and was eventually disbanded, reducing the institutional space for regional coordination.
The distance education and information systems components suffered from serious delays, obsolete technology, and limited uptake by faculty. Complex procurement procedures and a failed co financing arrangement with the Caribbean Development Bank led to late delivery of computer and satellite equipment that was already outdated and poorly adapted to tropical conditions. High connectivity costs and limited training for lecturers in distance education methods meant that technology was not fully integrated into teaching and that cost efficiency and regional reach of distance education remained far below expectations.
Lessons Learned
The evaluation highlights the importance of genuine stakeholder ownership and participatory design for regional higher education programmes. Although there had been consultation during preparation, key decisions such as the imposition of external technical assistance and a heavy governance structure were not co constructed with Caribbean universities, leading to scepticism, limited ownership, and a tendency to treat CULP mainly as a financing channel for existing or new courses. A more bottom up process of social construction with facilitated strategic planning and iterative adaptation of the logical framework might have strengthened regional commitment and alignment across actors.
The experience also underlines that ambitious regional integration goals cannot be delivered solely through a scholarship scheme without explicit investments in joint curriculum development, research cooperation, and institutional agreements on qualification recognition. Language training, initially omitted from the design, proved to be crucial for effective cooperation and should be integrated from the outset rather than added reactively when problems arise. Furthermore, rigid administrative and financial rules, including inflexible budget lines and delayed approval of annual work programmes, can undermine effectiveness and sustainability if they are not calibrated to the realities of universities and working students.
Implications for Policy and Programming
For future European Union and CARIFORUM initiatives in higher education, the CULP experience suggests the need for programme approaches with long term commitment rather than short projects, especially where regional integration is a core goal. Policymakers should combine support for thematic masters programmes with explicit funding and facilitation for regional research networks, staff exchanges, and recognition arrangements, ensuring that these elements have their own objectives, indicators, and governance mechanisms rather than being treated as implicit by products. Regional bodies such as CARIFORUM and specialised university networks should be supported not only as political sponsors but as active co managers with resources and mandates to drive integration agendas.
Donors and governments should also design financing modalities that allow for modular and part time study options, which are better suited to working professionals and can enhance gender equity and participation from smaller economies. Budget frameworks need sufficient flexibility to respond to technological change and to reallocate resources, for example from obsolete hardware to more appropriate connectivity or open source learning platforms. Finally, any replication of CULP style programmes should embed a clear alumni tracking and outcome monitoring system to capture long term impacts and inform adaptive management.
Potential for Scaling and Transferability
The evaluation concludes that core elements of CULP, notably regionally relevant masters programmes in strategic sectors and targeted scholarships for students from smaller and poorer countries, are transferable within the wider African Caribbean Pacific context. However, successful scaling would require careful attention to linguistic diversity, variation in university systems, and the political economy of competition and cooperation between institutions. Building on the CULP experience, newer initiatives such as EDULINK and other centres of excellence programmes can incorporate regional co design, stronger research components, and more explicit incentives for joint degrees or shared curricula.
Replication should also recognise that long term integration of tertiary education systems is an ongoing process that demands sustained investment and policy dialogue rather than a one off project. The evaluation points to European experiences with programmes such as Erasmus, Socrates, and Tempus as relevant inspiration for gradual development of a Caribbean or ACP wide higher education space, while noting that these models relied on substantial and predictable funding over many years.
Methodological Notes
The final evaluation was commissioned by the European Commission under a framework contract and carried out by a three person team from Euronet Consulting between November and December 2004. The team used a process approach grounded in Project Cycle Management, assessing the full project cycle from design through implementation to sustainability, and explicitly treating evaluation as part of a learning process rather than only an ex post control exercise. Methods combined document review, including financing agreements, mid term review, monitoring reports, course documents, and internal correspondence, with field visits and semi structured interviews.
Fieldwork covered European Commission headquarters, delegations in Jamaica, Barbados, Trinidad and the Dominican Republic, national authorising offices, CARIFORUM, programme management units, and implementing universities including UWI campuses and Dominican institutions. The team applied an implicit strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats perspective in interviews, reconstructed a time phasing of the programme, and developed a problem tree and logical framework refinements. Constraints included a long delay between programme closure and evaluation, loss or dispersion of project data, limited time for quantitative analysis, and disruption caused by Hurricane Ivan in Jamaica, all of which reduced the scope for detailed cost benefit and tracer studies.
Stakeholder Perspectives
Students consistently expressed high satisfaction with the academic quality and relevance of the courses and reported that CULP had improved their job prospects and professional performance, especially in public sector and technical roles. Female students were particularly positive about opportunities created by scholarships and regional study, which they may not otherwise have accessed. Students from the Dominican Republic highlighted their collaboration with Haitian colleagues as an exceptional learning experience that challenged stereotypes and fostered a broader Caribbean identity.
University administrators and faculty valued the institutional strengthening effects but were critical of complex administrative guidelines, procurement delays, and the tone and quantitative focus of the mid term review, which many felt undermined morale. CARIFORUM and government representatives appreciated CULP as an important regional initiative, though they acknowledged that national political and budgetary support for sustainability remained limited. European Commission staff in Brussels and delegations viewed the programme as innovative but challenging to manage due to inexperience with such regional co management in the Caribbean and the wide range of stakeholders involved.
Key Data Points and Indicators
The total CULP budget amounted to approximately 24.7 million euro, including about fourteen point nine million euro for the seven masters courses and about three point three million euro for distance education, language training, and information systems. At least four hundred five scholarship holders completed their programmes, and when all costs except works and supply contracts are included the average cost per graduate is estimated at 52 180 euro, while direct student related and course level costs averaged around 23 267 euro per graduate.
Natural Resource Management and Agricultural Diversification recorded the highest numbers of graduates, with 98 scholarship holders respectively, followed by Public Sector Management with fifty seven and International Business with fifty graduates. Roughly half of all CULP scholars came from Jamaica, Haiti, and Trinidad and Tobago, but when adjusted for population the highest scholarship densities were in Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Grenada, and Dominica, where the probability of obtaining a CULP scholarship was more than forty times higher than in the Dominican Republic. Only eight regional seminars were organised against a target of twenty, and no systematic alumni database or region wide credit transfer system was established.
Further Resources
Information on the evaluation and implementers can be found through the European Commission EuropeAid pages and the delegations for Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados, and the Dominican Republic, which are referenced in the report contact lists. CARIFORUM and the Caribbean Development Bank are important regional partners for human resource development and regional integration and are cited in the regional strategy and statistical annexes. The participating universities include the University of the West Indies Mona, Cave Hill, and Saint Augustine campuses, the University of Technology Jamaica, Pontificia Universidad Catolica Madre y Maestra, Universidad Catolica Santo Domingo, and Universidad Nacional Pedro Henriquez Urena, all of which are documented in the evaluation annexes.
The report also references regional education networks such as the Caribbean Network of Educational Innovation for Development CARNEID and international programmes like Erasmus, Socrates, and Tempus as comparative initiatives in regional higher education. Euronet Consulting, the evaluation contractor, can be contacted through the address and website indicated on the report cover page.
Report Citation
Becking, Marnix, and Axel Drescher, and Karsten Weitzenegger. Final Evaluation of the Caribbean University Level Programme (CULP). Final Report Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados, and Dominican Republic. Euronet Consulting, Brussels 2005.
Disclaimer: The author participated in this evaluation. The opinions expressed are solely those of the author and cannot be attributed to any affiliated organizations. Portions of the text and images were supported by artificial intelligence.