←

Giorgia Iacopini

MA, MSc

Principal Researcher/ Consultant

G.Iacopini@tavinstitute.org

+44(0)20 7417 0407

I am committed to my evaluation work as a learning and capacity-building process: I think of evaluation as crucially being about engagement in dialogue and collective reflection between evaluation stakeholders about the meaning of what they do and how they do it. I am also the current Chair of the UK Evaluation Society (UKES) London & South East Network, which aims to foster the development of evaluation theory and practice in the Region.

Areas of interest

I work extensively and regularly with the public sector including central and local government and community and voluntary sectors, undertaking impact and process evaluations of a number of large and smaller programmes (use primarily theory-based evaluation approaches and qualitative research methods). My work cuts across a variety of policy areas and I have a particular interest in social inclusion, community cohesion and the prevention of violent extremism; young people and risky behaviours and partnership working. Another element of my work is about providing training and support for self-evaluation, particularly to local government practitioners and third sector organisations. I am currently doing a Professional Doctorate at the University of Bath’s Institute for Policy Research, as part of which I am engaging with the theories, methods and practices of policymaking. Using my professional practice and my project work to reflect on the relationship between policy and evaluation, my Doctorate work to date has focused on the complexity and creativity with which local institutions ‘enact’ policy (rather than simply ‘implement’), as well as on the powerful role of ideas and rhetoric in the policy-making process, and in policy change, and what this means for evaluation practice.

Approach to my work

I believe that meaningful evaluation –both its process and outputs- is not only about concluding whether something has worked. I see evaluation as being able to serve as a basis for organisational development through a process of learning and capacity-building. In my approach to my work I, therefore, combine research methods with organisational consulting techniques working with stakeholders of an evaluation to generate, use and understand evidence in order to continuously improve the programmes of work for the communities they serve. I draw on a variety of frameworks, gained from my training at the Tavistock Institute and work experiences and Doctoral studies: alongside using my expertise in evaluation theory and research methods, I use my understanding of organisations and change and draw on the Tavistock Institute principles of group dynamics and using a systems perspective, that lends themselves particularly well for understanding complex ‘on the ground’ situations that don’t lend themselves to easy packaging. I also draw on my knowledge of policy analysis and understanding of policy-making and policy change (and how evidence fits within this) derived from my Doctorate studies, to critically reflect on how policy works takes place locally.

Examples of current and recent work

  • I recently co-directed the Grantholder Learning Strand (The National Community Lottery Fund), part of the Evaluation of the Coronavirus Community Support Fund (CCSF), which involved designing and delivering online learning events for CCSF grantees (through an online platform). The aim was to support voluntary sector organisations to share their challenges, learning, and offer capacity building sessions (which included evaluation ‘surgeries’) while they delivered during the COVID-19 pandemic.
  • Evaluation of the Flexible Working for Older Workers Pilot project (Centre for Ageing Better): The purpose of this pilot project was to support two large employers to increase the availability, and take up (by older workers), of more flexible working arrangements. The evaluation (2019 - 2021) set out to understand ‘what works’ in implementing and facilitating access to flexible working, for which people, and in what kinds of situations; and to explore the individual and organisational factors that support success. We adopted a theory-based approach (informed by realist principles specifically), therefore focusing on understanding what works, for whom, and why.
  • I was part of the research team working on two Horizon 2020 projects: 1) the evaluation of TCBL (Textiles and Clothing Business Lab), a project that aimed to stimulate large scale change in the European textiles and clothing sector to make it more environmentally and socially sustainable. As part of this work, we applied concepts of complexity, ecosystems thinking to a theory of change based process and impact evaluation; 2) the evaluation of Designscapes, a project that aimed to explore how design can help produce new solutions for dealing with wicked problems in our cities. The evaluation framework combines four elements: participatory action research, theory of change, behavioural additionality and replication analysis.
  • I was part of the training team for the British Council evaluation capacity building programme, which involved designing and delivering a four-day evaluation literacy course across four geographical locations. This is part of the Tavistock Institute’s wider evaluation capacity-building work, as part of which I have also delivered, with colleagues, evaluation training to policy analysts across different Government departments (on behalf of the Civil Service Learning).
  • Process and Impact evaluation of the Adoption Support Fund (ASF). Funded by the Department for Education, this programme aimed to increase positive outcomes for adopted children and adoptive families. My role in the work was to lead the qualitative case study work in 10 local authority areas.
  • I have been involved in all of the Tavistock Institute’s impact and process evaluations of the Preventing Violent Extremism programme for a range of local authorities across the UK (Hounslow, Tower Hamlets, Lancashire, Peterborough and Birmingham) and I lead the TIHR’s work in this area. Most recently, this has included research (funded by the Home Office) into what ‘effective’ Prevent implementation looks like. The overall purpose of the work was to develop a Guide, aimed at those who are interested in delivering projects with a Prevent focus (or who may already be doing so), offering practical tips to guide practice in what is a complex and challenging area of work.

Recent publications