RCLA Presentation Slides


Published on

Published in: Career, Education, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • IIE – 93 years old founded in 1919, etc.LDM program funded by Packard in 1999 in seven countries and later reduced to five – the five countries are Ethiopia, India, Nigeria, Pakistan and PhilippinesCreated and managed by IIE West Coast Center in San Francisco and later with IIE’s new Sub-Saharan Africa office based in Ethiopia.We will start
  • LDM program has worked in the most critical and challenging environments in the world to promote RH/FP .The program has worked in cultural and political context that are often restrictive and traditionally unreceptive to contraception or family planning.The program has focus their effort in areas with significant need for health services, education and advocacy.
  • To that end the LDM program recruited and trained fellows from different sphere of the civil society who could influence RH/PF and leadership in each country. The LDM fellows are lawyers, public health professionals, journalist, academics, trainers, community health workers, doctors, nurses. Some of them work in NGO’s, non-profit org , media (newspapers, radio) and in government agencies to improve the quality of care, provide family planning services to prevent maternal and childhood mortality; prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS, empower women and youth (against harmful practices) or how are teaching vulnerable populations to ensure safe sexual and reproductive health.Training – The program provide a wide range of opportunities both outside home country and over time (2006) more programs were developed in country to give consideration to country-specific context. LDM allowed each country to design trainings using local resources engaging local partners . The majority of the Fellows have participated in short-term leadership and reproductive health training workshops, as well as other leadership development activities. Their trainings have included courses on reproductive health management, transformational leadership, and other technical training aimed at improving reproductive health services and policies. LDM staff have also strategically designed trainings to bring leaders from diverse context together and open the possibility of learning from other organizations and cultures, such as study tours on Family Planning and Islam. They have also designed courses that responded to a skills gap they observed such as writing and documentation, presentation skills, leadership and policy advocacy. Network: a vey important element in the program specially in the last phase. LDM become aware that collective action and networking was essential to achieve systemic change and the sustainability of the program. MinigrantsWorking towards sustanability
  • RCLA Presentation Slides

    1. 1. USING PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH FOR LEADERSHIP PROGRAM EVALUATIONAn Evaluation of the IIE Leadership Development for Mobilizing Reproductive Health Program
    2. 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. 3. Session Content LDM Background and Rationale for Evaluation RCLA & overview of Methodology Gains and Challenges of Methodology Questions?
    4. 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. 5. Leadership Development forMobilizing 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. 6. LDM: Overall AimTo build a critical core of well-trained leaders who have thevision, commitment, knowledgeand skills to improvereproductive health and familyplanning services in five focuscountries:Ethiopia, Nigeria, India, Pakistan, and the Philippines
    7. 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
    8. 8. About RCLARCLA 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”
    9. 9. Principles of PA Researchas 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
    10. 10. Why RCLA/IIE used PAR toevaluate 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
    11. 11. What was the Purpose of theLDM 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
    12. 12. 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
    13. 13. Mixed Methods Approach Document Review Action Reflection Groups Key Informant Interviews National Meetings
    14. 14. 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
    15. 15. 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
    16. 16. 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
    17. 17. 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
    18. 18. 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
    19. 19. 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.
    20. 20. QUESTIONS? 21
    21. 21. 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
    22. 22. 23