JIIS Archives

Scholarships for postgraduate education provided by the donor countries have contributed to the development of individual capacity. This international cooperation mechanism has played a valuable role in filling the gaps created by underdeveloped the domestic higher education system of Guatemala. Different sources acknowledge difficulties in efficiency, coverage, and access to Guatemalan universities (Sacayon 2012; Tobar 2011; Godinez and Tobar 2005). Therefore, donor support has alleviated shortages of highly educated Guatemalan human resources. Experts (Soto 2013; Arenas 2012) estimate that nearly 500 Guatemalans have been awarded full scholarships to pursue postgraduate education (master/doctorate), considered in this study up to February 2013. This is consistent with the data collected from donors and from the Government of Guatemala summarized in <Table 3>. Valuable financial resources have enabled Guatemalans to access postgraduate education in foreign universities, without which they would be unable to attend.

Considering that capacity development at the individual level includes knowledge acquisition and skills improvement (UNDP 1997), there is an evidence that postgraduate scholarships equip graduates with advanced knowledge in their fields. A returned graduate shared her experience:

“I became [a] specialist in my field. Before going overseas I was a general doctor, but after my studies in Germany, a new opportunity was opened for me to obtain innovative techniques and cutting-edge knowledge about preventive and curative health.” (Interview with a returned graduate)

According to Hamza (2010), having an international experience in higher education might enable transformative learning resulting in changes in professional attitudes as well as behavioral transformations. This is consistent with Gilboy et al. (2004) who argue that overseas education exposes the participants to other practices, lifestyles, and mind-sets, which will produce complementary transformation in the international students. In this sense, another interviewee expressed that the international education not only facilitated the acquisition of technical knowledge but also the development of other skills:

“I became an international worker, with advanced academic English skills. I gained deeper analytic skills, research abilities, and a wider understanding of international affairs. In negotiations I became more skillful, with a better understanding of the international job market, and the relations Guatemala can develop with more countries with better results.” (Interview with a returned graduate)

While successful completion of overseas postgraduate educational programs with the reward of an advanced academic degree might be considered as an evidence of capacity development at the individual level (acquisition of knowledge and development of skills), qualitative data provides evidences that the effectiveness of the donor support at this level has encountered certain challenges.

Understanding of responsibilities and sense of commitment. Attitudes of direct beneficiaries (scholarship awardees) tend to determine the sense of responsibility and commitment toward scholarship. Arenas (2012) remarks that “in several cases people benefitted from full scholarships consider such opportunities as a recognition to their academic achievements instead of a commitment to contribute to the development of Guatemala”. Returned graduates were asked about their perception regarding the meaning of a full scholarship award. Their responses were divided into two categories: inward implications and outward implications. The former emphasized on individual gains or personal improvements while the latter outward implications expressed concerns not only for themselves but for wider social benefits. As it can be seen in <Table 4> 65% of interviewees were included in the first category by using terms such as “access to better employment opportunities”, “salary increment”, “interest in job promotions”, “securing higher degree of influence”, while 35% reported outward implications such as“ contribution to the development of my country”, “import better practices and knowledge from abroad”, “gaining advanced knowledge to teach to my students”, “help to build progress in Guatemala.”

Having career expectations and ambitions for better employment are legitimate individual goals. However, as scholarships are publically arranged foreign aid resources, a sense of responsibility for the development of Guatemala is expected for scholarship awardees. Cheema (2003, 7) sustains that “individuals must have clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities; personal commitment and a spirit of cooperation need to be recognized”. This is consistent with Bolger (2000, 5) who argues that individual knowledge “skills and abilities have to contribute to the realization of development goals”. From the capacity development perspective, change at the individual level should be contemplated as part of a broader framework; without a systemic approach the effectiveness of the international cooperation intervention might be compromised.

Focus on acquisition of core competencies for the development of Guatemala. For decades, the production of highly educated human resources (holders of a master/doctor degree) concentrated heavily in the field of social sciences in Guatemala (Godinez and Tobar 2006). Also, this is the generalized pattern in other Latin American countries. Multiple sources (Brunner 2012; Oppenheimer 2009; Walter 2000) sustain that science and technology is understudied in Latin America. In the case of Guatemala, there is an acute need for specialization apart from the social sciences. In 2011, the entire higher education system of Guatemala produced thirty-seven doctors of philosophy, all of whom concentrated in the social sciences (RYCIT 2013). Those Guatemalans who graduated with master’s degrees registered similar areas of concentration. From the 2,093 Guatemalans who completed their masters, 63% studied in the social sciences (RYCIT 2013). Also, this skewness is shown in the scholarships provided by donor countries, with 42% of the programs concentrated in the social sciences, followed by engineering with 24%, natural sciences with 21%, and medical sciences with 14% (see <Table 5>). Countries with the economic and social stage of development like Guatemala require further human resources educated in innovation and entrepreneurship (Rubio, 2013).This premise could motivate the targeting of scholarships toward such fields. In addition, 91% of the donor support is concentrated in master’s program.

Mismatch between the education needs for national development and the fields in which donor support has been concentrated could be explained by the inexistence of diagnosis and clear public policies. In addition, limited dialogue between donors and the relevant public institutions in Guatemala could have resulted in a “get-the-most-out-of-the-system attitude” (Lopes and Theison 2003, 171) in which donors offer scholarships according to their own agenda and Guatemala accepts them without questioning. One interviewee manifested:

“The Government of Guatemala has not approached us to present the needs for training and education. Therefore, we follow our own guidelines. For example, Guatemala suffers from child malnutrition. If we are requested to allocate the scholarship programs into that particular need to combat such problems, I am positive it would be highly considered by the donor.” (Interview with a returned graduate)

We can see that typical supply driven approach prevailed in the scholarship programs without any sign of ownership from demand (Guatemala) side. In order to progress in the alignment of the international cooperation efforts to the postgraduate education needs of Guatemala, both the Government of the partner country and donors have to engage in further dialogue.

Inclusion and equal access to opportunities. Like all other countries, for centuries, higher education has been considered as a privilege reserved for the elites in Guatemala. During the colonial period of 1523 and 1821, only the direct descendants of Spanish conquerors had an access to higher education (Tobar 2011) and only a few citizens could be considered academics or scholars. Even after Guatemala gained independence, a systemic exclusion of women, indigenous and the poor prevailed until after the 1944 revolution when higher education became more accessible to the less privileged. Even today, the inequality that prevails within the social and economic layers of the Guatemalan society can be explained partly by education divide (Torres-Rivas 2006). The indigenous population represents over 50% of the total Guatemalans. However, the access of the native Guatemalans to higher education has been limited for various reasons. Edda (2004, 49) enumerates that “discrimination, linguistic barriers, poverty, lack of higher education facilities in rural areas, restrictive admission requirements, among others” attribute to these limitations.

Unfortunately, the data collected for this study indicates that donor support for postgraduate scholarships poses similar restrictions to the traditionally excluded: women, indigenous, poor and rural Guatemalans. From the 46 graduates interviewed for this study, only two (less than 1%) identified themselves as indigenous. Two-thirds were male and an overwhelming 89% reported to come from urban areas. One key barrier for many to access donor support for international education was the requirement of English proficiency. From the nine scholarship programs only two conducted postgraduate education in Spanish, and, conversely, seven of them required advanced English skills without providing language training. Understandably, English proficiency is required for international education, but, nevertheless, particular social, ethnic, and historical characteristics of Guatemala could be considered to avoid excluding marginalized groups.

The consolidation of capacity development at the organizational/institutional level requires different conditions. A well-trained, productive person needs access to finance, information, technology, infrastructure and other resources (UNDP 1997). Often this means working within (or related to) an entity that has an organizational structure with a clear mission, clear goals, functions, systems and resources (such as a public body, a private business, an NGO or a community-based group). This would imply that development of human capacity by itself is not sufficient to achieve the ultimate goal of international development efforts: producing nationwide impact on development. The organizational approach sees an entity, organization or sets of organizations as the key for development (Lusthaus, Adrien and Pertinger 1999). Consequently, the assessment on the effectiveness of capacity development at the organizational/institutional level, influence of the returned graduates in their job positions upon return, applicability of acquired knowledge and skills and the nature (supportive/ unsupportive) of working environments is necessary.

Occupation of leadership position and decision-making posts. Such activities of acquisition of new knowledge and skills development by individuals are not automatically converted to social capital by itself. Well-trained people have to be recognized by wider groups and organizations in order to achieve capacity development impact (Pearson 2010, 8). This recognition is a merit-based working context which might be understood in terms of promotions and career development. When considering “career development,” this means promotions, increments of salary, or acquisition of directive powers in the place of employment. Amongst the forty-six interviewees, thirty-nine (85%) reported to have been holding middle-rank jobs at the time of the scholarship awarding, while four (8%) held an operative position, and three (7%) were occupying managerial positions. The figure was significantly different at the time of the interview as fourteen (26%) reported to holding middle-rank jobs while none of them was holding an operative position, and as many as thirty four (74%) were occupying managerial positions.

This research makes the case for “contribution” instead of “attribution” when explaining the influence of obtaining a foreign postgraduate degree in explaining job improvements. Alternative explanations for the work incentives of the returning graduates might be the normal pass of time, complementary training, and good performance, among others. However, various interviewees also attributed to their international education experience increment in their level of influence and responsibilities upon return. Similarly, nearly 90% of the interviewees reported to have gained a salary increase after returning from the international education, while 10% expressed that their work compensation remained the same as prior to their overseas postgraduate studies. None of them reported a decrease in their salary. By establishing incentives (promotions, salary increments etc.), organizations increase their possibilities by absorbing and retaining highly educated human resources and mitigate the risk of brain drain from Guatemala.

Application of the newly acquired knowledge and skills. In Guatemala there prevails a wide-spread skepticism about the applicability of advanced knowledge acquired abroad. Some researchers consider that higher education is only effective to the extent that it is related to the social problems of the country (Arenas 2012; Forg et al. 2009). Forg et al. (2009, 6) argue that “capacity development cannot be achieved through the knowledge and know-how of the individuals concerned, the institutions in which these individuals and groups live must be of certain quality.” Participants of the present study were asked about their experience in the application of knowledge and skills once they returned to Guatemala. One interviewee shared her experience:

“When I decided to go abroad to study the production of edible fungi as a dietary alternative to combat undernourishment that sadly affects over 40% of children under 6 years old, my peers and family were not supportive, as they believed that it would be impossible to use my knowledge in Guatemala as our staple continues to be beans and corn. Yet, I obtained a scholarship and specialized in the matter. Indeed, local institutions did not hire me… not even my previous employer [San Carlos University of Guatemala]. Consequently, I opened my own laboratory and founded a farm for edible new plantations, but even getting financing was extremely hard, however I managed to transfer this technology to Guatemala.” (Interview with a returned graduate)

In this case, resistance to change and the lack of financing place challenges to the application of new knowledge. Another interviewee mentioned equipment and inadequate technology as main obstacles:

“Applying my new knowledge in Guatemala was not easy. The National Hospital San Juan de Dios did not accept my proposals to improve the services. The hospital claimed lack of equipment, and insufficient medical protocols. The needed technology was not available in Guatemala either. Losing practice and continuity is not recommended when engaged in surgical procedures.” (Interview with a returned graduate)

Nevertheless, some institutions dedicated to teaching and research provided more fertile spaces to facilitate transfer of knowledge and application of skills, although limitations remain.

“Yes, we are doing progressive changes in my department, but we have been realistic. The number of researchers and professors with international experience is still limited, and in order for us to promote deeper changes related to publications, journals and knowledge production, it has to be done with the participation of higher numbers, a massive effort, but currently we still have only isolated attempts. For example, by having more peers with research interests and international experience we have access to peer reviewers, but right now we are still in the process of accreditation of our majors and improvement of the quality of our academic programs. We are still far away from other more advanced universities, but we are trying to improve”. (Interview with a returned graduate)

Supportive work environment. The stage of social and economic development of Guatemala determines the need of capacity development in Guatemala. On one hand, the prevalence of an economic structure based on exporting agricultural products and trading commodities and raw materials with limited value addition questions to the necessity of having a skillful and highly educated work force. Some interviewees consider that the agriculture based economic structure of Guatemala makes it harder for highly educated people to find employment opportunities. One of the returned graduates expressed:

“The moment that in Guatemala having a doctoral degree is required to be employed in a sugar cane plantation… then our human talent will be appreciated. Economic conditions are given for manual work, we are still far from moving toward a knowledgebased economy in which science and technology play a significant role, only then human talent will be in need.” (Interview with a returned graduate)

On the other hand, the low indicator of higher education enrollment and successful completion, along with the limited offer of postgraduate education with satisfactory quality, has resulted in shortages of specialized human capital. Frequently, Guatemalans do not apply for scholarships due to fear of losing job during the reincorporation process (Gonzalez 2013). Most of the beneficiaries are forced to quit before going abroad for study. Thirty-four (74%) out of the forty-six interviewees reported either voluntarily or involuntarily terminating their work relation with their employer before applying for the scholarship. Some of the interviewees reported to have passed through a “traumatic experience” when applying for a new job as their overseas obtained degree was disregarded or even discarded, being “overqualified” for the position, whereas others attributed the same cause to a higher degree of acceptance and better job opportunities.

“I didn’t come back to work for the Ministry of Economy. There was a change in government authorities: the new policies and programs of the elected government were not a continuation of the ones we promoted before departure. Also, staff had also changed, the mystic was depleted, and therefore I moved to a different job when I returned.” (Interview with a returned graduate)

Lack of meritocracy, understood as the process by which an employer hires new employees based on his/her knowledge, abilities, or skills, makes it difficult for the returned graduates to be considered for positions (Goyzueta 2013; de Leon 2013). Organizations and institutions in Guatemala would greatly benefit by implementing merit-based recruitment process as this would make them more attractive to human talent and enforce a systematic strengthening work culture.

To address the effectiveness of a capacity development intervention at the societal level, it is imperative to consider the existence of relevant public policies, plans, as well as related legal frameworks. Morra-Imas and Rist (2006) emphasize the responsibility of partner countries to integrate specific capacity-development objectives into national strategies. These instruments reflect the ability and willingness of global systems (private and public sector, organized civil society and other actors) to reform (UNDP 1997), and the optimum use of synergies among the different sectors of a society whichever maximizes or hinders the outcomes and impact of a capacity development intervention. In addition, Honalde (1981, 577) frames societal capacity development as the “ability to make informed decisions, and attract and absorb resources” as well as forces of the global context that might provide either an enabling or a constraining environment (cited in Bolger 2000). For the purpose of this study, the collected data was analyzed to see the existence of a national strategy for capacity development targeting highly educated human resources. Also, the discussion includes the engagement among different sectors of the society for the optimum use of the knowledge and skills incorporated to Guatemala through the returned graduates and the importance of producing reliable information to make informed decisions.

National strategy for capacity development. Guatemala needs to embrace the challenge of designing and implementing a national strategy for capacity development in order to produce and manage effectively its human capital. Different sources (Gutierrez 2014; Meza 2013; Cuevas, Lee and Pineda 2010) coincide that the prevalence of national leaderships based on a short-term vision, unstable institutional structures, and an insufficient maturity of the political and institutional systems have resulted in the inability to produce solid strategies for national development. Instead, every president in office has been implementing a four year government plan. Moreover, a new administration discards most plans and projects designed and implemented by the predecessor by starting from scratch. Berthelemy and Varoudakis (1996) emphasize that “political commitment to condition policies and structures to the efficient use of the skills available can influence growth; human capital is necessary to assimilate and master modern production techniques or to design technical innovations” (Berthelemy and Varoudakis, 1996, 32). In this perspective, the lack of continuity in demand-driven development processes, periodic changes in government, and an incipient civil service partially explain the absence of capacity development from the public debate. Experts (Mack 2013; Arenas 2012) explain that in order to maximize the social impact of the donor-sponsored postgraduate scholarships, more attention should be given to build a policy framework and a capacity development national strategy.

The Government of Guatemala participates in the donor support for postgraduate scholarships through two institutions: The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MINEX) and the National Secretariat for Planning and Programming of the Presidency (SEGEPLAN). The former is in charge of the establishment and expansion of relations with the donor countries as well as attending to Guatemalans during their postgraduate education in the host countries. The latter administers the information about scholarships’ provisions and intermediates some of the processes in which SEGEPLAN performs an active role, either by handling the paper work or participating in the selection committees. MINEX plays a passive role, mainly through the embassies and foreign missions posted in the respective donor countries. There is no evidence on the existence of focused strategy to efficiently negotiate and direct the donor support in scholarship program. MINEX limits its function to receiving only the offers and delivering them to SEGEPLAN as well as keeping an outdated registry of applicants to the different programs.

“The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has oriented the foreign policy of Guatemala in different areas such as diplomatic and political relations, commercial ties, tourism, and culture promotion. As for specific cooperation for education and training of Guatemalans overseas, the responsibility has been granted to SEGEPLAN…this is the institution in charge of concentrating the international cooperation policies of Guatemala; therefore, there has been a shared and coordinated work between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and SEGEPLAN. However, for the past decades human resource’s development has not been a national priority” (Interview with Salazar, former vice-Minister of MINEX 2013).

Traditionally, SEGEPLAN has played an intermediary role between the candidates applying for scholarships and the donors, some of whom are included in this study. SEGEPLAN is actively engaged in advertising and spreading information pertaining to scholarships by means of a complex informatics system accessible to the citizens through the internet. The intermediary role of SEGEPLAN has been recurrently criticized as it is limited to “handling paperwork without a critical participation in the process” (Goyzueta 2013). For the most part, government officials acknowledge that SEGEPLAN’s participation in the capacity development intervention follows a procurement approach instead of holding a long-term policy oriented perspective (Perez 2013).

“SEGEPLAN is the institution legally entitled to administrate the scholarships and training opportunities offered by the donor community [for Guatemala]. There are several functions and responsibilities that the legal frame of Guatemala assigns to SEGEPLAN. We try to promote an optimum use of this international cooperation, as we understand the importance of human capital for the development of our nation. However, this mechanism is usually relegated to attend other priorities” (Interview with E. Parrilla, National Secretary of SEGEPLAN, 4 May, 2013).

Human capital is fundamental for the development of Guatemala. Therefore isolated efforts to produce a highly skilled labor force will have limited impact on the society unless those actions are framed into a concerted national work, as Bolger (2000, 4) suggests “poorly conceived policies can make for a disabling environment” with constraining consequences for capacity development initiatives.

Engagement among different sectors of society to participate in the capacity development mechanism. Society is formed by various systems and subsystems, which have different levels of participation in particular initiatives. For the purpose of this study, different sectors of the Guatemalan society were consulted through key informants regarding their involvement in the development of capacity through postgraduate scholarship provision. These sectors included the public sector, the private sector, higher education institutions and civil society. The role of the public sector was reported by different interviewees as “not being sensitive” to facilitate the participation of civil servants in capacity development program. Various scholarship programs target public officers for scholarships to study abroad, but authorization for leave of absence is not granted to scholarships awardees. Of the 46 graduates interviewed, 10 (22%) were working for public institutions at the time of the nomination and all of them reported that their employers denied them permission to participate in overseas educational programs. This situation forced them to terminate their positions. Mack (2012) remarked that a “restrictive work culture in this sense dissuades civil servants to apply for a scholarship opportunity”. Furthermore, little appreciation for academic qualifications makes the public sector less attractive for returning graduates. In addition, interviewees reported the job seeking process as “one of the biggest challenges” of returning from their academic programs abroad.²

On the other hand, the Guatemalan private sector was regarded by various interviewees as being more supportive towards training and education efforts. Mayora (2013) explained that “private firms of medium and large capital usually are opened to nominate candidates for scholarships and later re-incorporate returned graduates to job positions as long as these are available.” However, most private businesses recruit less skilled workers as they are not willing to increase their salary burden. Additionally, lack of networks and unclear recruitment processes remain a barrier for highly skilled human resources when they spend important periods of time away from Guatemala (Manpower Group 2013). This situation contrasts with the reflections of the Task Force (2002, 11) who says, “[i]ncreasing openness, encouraging the development of knowledge and revenue sharing links with business, and the deepening of the dialogue among sectors will lead to stronger democracy and more resilient nation states.”

Also, higher education institutions were condemned for not facilitating the reincorporation of the returned graduates. Some of the interviewees mentioned: “lack of transparent and competitive recruitment procedures, unclear rules and insufficient incentives” among others as defects of the home country academic institutions. This finding is surprising as the institution in charge of higher education policies and guidelines in Guatemala –San Carlos of Guatemala University- has recognized the urgent need to upgrade the qualification of professors and faculty members of universities in Guatemala (Galvez 2006). Various interviewees confirmed that they were willing to become full-time professors or to engage in teaching activities, but the opportunity was never made available. One interviewee indicated:

“I tried to contribute to Guatemala based on the benefits I received through the scholarship, I wanted to teaching at USAC [San Carlos University of Guatemala] but the doors did not open for me; they [authorities] told me I could not be considered for a teaching position if I did not join the political activism for the incumbent Dean.” (Interview with a returned graduate)

As for the private universities, they welcome faculty with foreign obtained degrees; however, working conditions are not as satisfactory as public institutions. Professors are underpaid and have limited access to the necessary resources to improve academic performance. Nevertheless, two private universities were preferred as attractive destination to many of the returned graduates: Rafael Landivar and del Valle University. Both of them have made nascent efforts towards education quality improvement and research requirements for faculty members. Universities in Guatemala could greatly enhance the capacity by recruiting returning graduates. Studies (Dodani and Laporte 2005; Kapur 2001; The Task Force 2000) sustain that faculty with international experience and networking capabilities can facilitate local academic institutions to create a more advanced academic atmosphere, enabling technology absorption and developing “wisdom gain” (Dodani and Laporte 2005).

For this study, civil society defined as non-government organizations playing a role in the development of capacity through postgraduate education programs for Guatemalans. One of them is the Institute for the Development of Higher Education in Guatemala: INDESGUA. Many graduates, government officers and donor representatives, indicate that INDESGUA is the most experienced organization participating in the capacity development intervention with 10,000 members who actively work in counseling, advising … couching Guatemalan candidates applying for scholarships; also, facilitating access to information for the sake of higher education in Guatemala (Gonzalez 2013, 19).

A second organization is the Center of Mesoamerican Studies (CIRMA in Spanish).CIRMA operated in Guatemala from 2003 to 2012 and gave scholarships through the Ford Foundation to one hundred and twenty-eight professionals from different ethnic groups and regions of the country. This organization promoted leadership and academic excellence; as well as included disadvantaged groups and committed to community development. Corresponding efforts by the different sectors of the Guatemalan society would lead to enhancing the impact of the donor support. Admittedly, this is challenging “given the allegiances to traditional ways of doing business, competing priorities and lack of coordination” (Bolger 2000). Nevertheless, capacity problems, constraints, and solutions need to be considered from a systems perspective through the consideration of the dynamics and inter-relationships among various issues and actors in different dimensions.

Reliable information to make informed intelligent decisions about policy. A key element for transparency and good policy formulation is the production of reliable information for intelligent decision making. Data, statistics and different sorts of registries are fundamental for planning and programming of capacity development initiatives. Gewalli (2009, 1) claims that “every country needs to create knowledge on society as a prerequisite for making political decisions on a sound basis.” Therefore, reliable and trustworthy information is needed so policy makers can make evidencebased planning and policy decisions.

Regrettably, diagnosis for capacity development needs have not been attempted yet in Guatemala. Similarly, a systematic outlook of the current situation does not appear as a priority for the public agenda. Sacayon (2012) sustains that “the constant replacement of personnel, lack of registries and weak culture of planning and programming has had pervasive negative effects on the availability of information on human resources in Guatemala.” Under the circumstances, lack of the steady source of reliable and consolidated information eliminates the possibility of measuring progress and impact of postgraduate scholarships. The study has consulted with the relevant institutions of the Government of Guatemala as well as with the nine representatives of the selected donors. Both parties remarked that registries –when available– are outdated and incomplete. Currently, the lack of information is constant for every stage of the capacity development intervention. For example, databases of scholarship awardees have been generated by some of the donors; however, they register only the grant of the scholarship without follow-ups. In other words, most donors (with the exception of the Fulbright program) do not track down those who successfully completed their academic degree. The records of the Government of Guatemala are even less available. One officer of SEGEPLAN indicated:

“After the scholarships are awarded the accepted students travel abroad without further control. Rarely SEGEPLAN is notified of follow-up updates, most importantly, we don’t know if the beneficiaries complete their programs or if they return to Guatemala.” (Interview with E. Perez, 6 Jan, 2013)

San Carlos of Guatemala University is supposed to be responsible for the registration and validation of foreign degrees received by Guatemalans. However, from the forty-six interviewees only three reported to completing the recognition process. Most of them expressed that the incorporation was: “bureaucratic, lengthy, expensive and complicated.” Also, they mentioned that the validation of their degrees to the Guatemalan context did not make any difference when seeking employment, so they did not consider it necessary. The breach of this requirement makes it virtually impossible to keep a reliable registry of the highly educated Guatemalans who have obtained academic degrees from overseas universities and institutions of higher education. Also, all interviewees were asked whether they had participated in a study, assessment exercise, or other mechanism examining their international educational experience. The majority (95%) of all interviewees responded they have never been exposed to any related study conducted by the Government of Guatemala, donors or by independent researchers. Singh (2002) proposes that the recipient government is responsible to ensure adequate mechanism to empower capacity development interventions, including the provision of relevant information, data, and indicators. This is relevant to guarantee all actors to make informed decisions. Otherwise, Gewalli (2009, 4) warns that “lack of evidence-based decision making can lead to both public and donor resources being poorly targeted and wasted.” Conversely, access to information increases the effectiveness of donor support allocation and gives citizens further opportunities to hold their government accountable.