1. USING PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH FOR LEADERSHIP
PROGRAM EVALUATION
An Evaluation of the IIE Leadership Development for Mobilizing
Reproductive Health Program

2. Session Objectives
 To share the Action
Reflection methodology
as RCLA and IIE used it
in the evaluation of the
IIE-LDM program
 Sharing our experiences
around this theme and
reflect on the merits and
challenges of
participatory evaluation
methodologies

3. Session Content
 LDM Background and Rationale for Evaluation
 RCLA & overview of Methodology
 Gains and Challenges of Methodology
 Questions?

4. Institute of International Education (IIE)
 A leader in helping to solve global issues through
international exchange of people and ideas
 Designs and implements programs of study and
training for individuals from all sectors -- over 250
programs each year in more than 175 countries
 IIE’s West Coast Center created and managed the
Leadership Development for Mobilizing Reproductive
Health (LDM) program with funding from the David &
Lucile Packard Foundation in 1999

5. Leadership Development for
Mobilizing Reproductive Health (LDM)
 Created and managed by the
Institute of International
Education (IIE)
 Generously funded by The
David & Lucile Packard
Foundation from 2001-2011

6. LDM: Overall Aim
To build a critical core of well-
trained leaders who have the
vision, commitment, knowledge
and skills to improve
reproductive health and family
planning services in five focus
countries:
Ethiopia, Nigeria, India, Pakista
n, and the Philippines

7. LDM Fellows and Program Activities
 A total of 1200 fellows from
Ethiopia, Philippines, Nigeria,
Pakistan and India
 Training
 Study tours
 Establishing and supporting
networks and collaborations
 Mini-grants
 Working toward sustainability
of leadership development in
country

9. About RCLA
RCLA recognizes that at its best, leadership for the public
good is a collective achievement.
 Launched in 2003 with support from the Ford
Foundation
 Part of NYU Wagner School
 Creates collaborative learning environments that foster
genuine connections
 Pioneers customized, experiential leadership programs
 Conducts rigorous social science research
 Integrates the best of scholarship and practice to create
knowledge “from the ground up”

10. Principles of PA Research
as used by RCLA
 Doing research with leaders rather than on leaders
 Co-production of knowledge
 Creating activities for co-researchers to observe &
analyze their own experience
 Making room for leaders to share their
experiences and learn from others
 Co-producing research products that are useful
for practitioners

11. Why RCLA/IIE used PAR to
evaluate the LDM program?
 Allowed us to engage key stakeholders, national
evaluators and IIE staff in the evaluation process
as “co-researchers” or “co-inquirers”
 We collectively assessed the program’s
effectiveness, gains, challenges and lessons
learned
 We also determined together how to develop
future actions based on the learning

12. What was the Purpose of the
LDM Evaluation?
 Consider LDM’s relevance, effectiveness and
achievements in reaching its goals and short-term
outcomes
 Encourage analysis and discussion of the program
outcomes and accomplishments as well as reflection
on the challenges and lessons learned
 Foster active involvement of stakeholders in
evaluation process
 Provide opportunities for key stakeholders to
discuss next steps

13. Scope of Evaluation
 Conducted in 5
countries: Ethiopia,
India, Nigeria, Pakistan
and Philippines
 Evaluation Team:
National evaluators and
RCLA evaluators with
LDM staff support
 2006-2011

14. Mixed Methods Approach
 Document Review
 Action Reflection Groups
 Key Informant Interviews
 National Meetings

15. Participatory Project Management
 Initial and Final Team workshops
 Team building
 Collaborative design of methodology and analysis of
findings
 Ongoing communications through email, telephone, Skype,
conference calls, Google group and the LDM wiki
 Flexibility according to cultural and program contexts

16. Action Reflection Groups (AR)
 A methodology developed by RCLA specifically for the
purposes of this evaluation
 Inspired by the Cooperative Inquiry approach
 Allows collective reflection and sense making
 CI and the AR groups call for taking into consideration
the experience and knowledge of practitioners

17. Action Reflection Group Design
 Three AR groups were formed in each country,
and each met three times for a day-long session
 Each AR group meeting was facilitated by a
National Evaluator specially trained in the
methodology
 National Evaluators designed the AR groups
based on the research questions
 Circles of Action/Reflection

18. National Meetings
 Designed in each
country after data
analysis
 Designed to reflect on
the evaluation’s initial
findings and discuss
sustainable next steps
 Included diverse
stakeholders from the
RH/FP and leadership
development fields

19. Gains of the Methodology
 Action Reflection groups were experienced as
participatory and empowering and provided a space
where participants discovered important insights that
led to concrete action
 The evaluation was a rich learning experience for
Fellows and Evaluators
 The methodology allowed for the collection of a large
amount of data in a short time
 The evaluation’s approach was fitting for LDM given the
collective nature of the program and its approach to
leadership
 Participants and evaluators stayed highly engaged and
committed to the process

20. Challenges of the Methodology
 Some Fellows and Evaluators perceived the
evaluation to be too process-oriented
 The documentation and codification of the data
according to the research matrix took everyone
more time than anticipated
 The methodology requires excellent documentation
and communications, which demanded extra
attention and follow-up.

21. QUESTIONS?
21

22. Contact Us
Research Center for Leadership in Action
NYU Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service
The Puck Building
295 Lafayette Street, 2nd Floor
New York, NY 10012
www.wagner.nyu.edu/leadership
Amparo Hofmann-Pinilla: amparo.hofmann@nyu.edu
Institute for International Education
Cheryl Francisconi
cfrancisconi@iie-ethiopia.org

23. 23