Program Evaluation & Impact Assessment — Youth Employment Initiative, Senegal

Measuring What Changed — and What Drove the Change

B.I.M. Corporation conducted an end-of-program evaluation and impact assessment of a four-year youth employment initiative that reached more than 4,500 young people across three regions of Senegal.

The assignment combined rigorous quantitative analysis with qualitative research to determine not only whether the program improved employment and income outcomes, but also the extent to which those changes could be attributed to the intervention and which program components were driving the greatest impact.

Client Profile

International NGO consortium implementing a youth employment program in West Africa.

Sector

International Development — Youth Employment & Entrepreneurship

Geography

Senegal Dakar • Thiès • Saint-Louis

Engagement Type

End-of-Program Evaluation & Impact Assessment

Duration

Approximately 5 months

Team

6 specialists Lead Evaluator • Impact Assessment Specialist • 2 Enumerators • Data Analyst • Quality Assurance

The Challenge

After four years of implementation, the youth employment program required a rigorous end-of-program evaluation to assess its overall performance and demonstrate measurable results.

The donor needed more than participant satisfaction data or simple before-and-after comparisons.

It required statistically defensible evidence addressing several critical questions:

• Did participation improve young people's employment prospects?

• Did the program contribute to increased income?

• Did it strengthen youth self-efficacy?

• How significant were the observed changes compared with what might have happened without the program?

• Which components of the intervention were responsible for the strongest results?

• Were the program's resources producing sufficient value relative to the outcomes achieved?

Answering these questions required an evaluation design capable of combining impact attribution, performance assessment, qualitative explanation, and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Our Approach

B.I.M. Corporation designed a quasi-experimental mixed-methods evaluation combining quantitative impact measurement with in-depth qualitative research.

The approach was structured to establish a credible counterfactual while also explaining the mechanisms behind the observed outcomes.

1. Beneficiary Tracer Survey

B.I.M. Corporation conducted a tracer survey covering 620+ program participants, achieving an 84% response rate.

The survey generated detailed information on participants' current employment status, income, economic activities, and other relevant outcome indicators.

2. Matched Comparison Group

To strengthen the assessment of program-attributable change, the team surveyed 340 non-participants with similar demographic and geographic characteristics.

This comparison group provided a counterfactual against which beneficiary outcomes could be assessed.

3. Propensity Score Matching

B.I.M. Corporation applied propensity score matching to improve comparability between participants and non-participants.

The analysis helped isolate differences in employment and income outcomes associated with program participation, providing a more robust estimate of the program's contribution than a simple beneficiary-versus-baseline comparison.

4. Qualitative Impact Research

Quantitative findings were complemented by 40+ in-depth interviews with:

• Successful beneficiaries;

• Beneficiaries who experienced limited or unsuccessful outcomes;

• Employers; and

• Program staff.

This qualitative component helped explain why the program worked for some participants more effectively than others and identified the contextual and programmatic factors influencing results.

5. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

The evaluation also examined the relationship between program investment and achieved outcomes.

B.I.M. Corporation calculated:

• Cost per employed beneficiary; and

• Cost per US$1,000 in additional beneficiary income.

This provided decision-makers with an additional lens for assessing program efficiency and informing future investment.

The Results

The evaluation produced the donor's strongest evidence base to date for programming decisions within its West Africa portfolio.

21 Percentage-Point Employment Effect

The evaluation documented an employment rate of:

62% among program beneficiaries

compared with

41% among the matched comparison group.

This represented a 21 percentage-point difference associated with program participation, providing strong evidence of positive employment effects.

45–55% Increase in Monthly Income

Among employed beneficiaries, average monthly income increased by approximately 45–55% compared with baseline, demonstrating meaningful economic gains among participants who transitioned into employment.

Key Drivers of Impact Identified

The evaluation identified two program components associated with disproportionately strong results:

Mentorship and Micro-grant seeding

These findings directly influenced the design of the successor program, with both components subsequently receiving greater priority.

Evidence Influenced Regional Funding Decisions

The findings were presented at a regional donor coordination forum and subsequently cited in a follow-on multi-country funding proposal.

The evaluation therefore served not only as an accountability exercise, but as a strategic evidence base for future program design and resource mobilization.

Impact at a Glance

4,500+	620+	340	62%	21 pp
Young people reached	Beneficiary survey respondents	Comparison group	Beneficiary employment rate	Employment effect

84% survey response rate • 40+ qualitative interviews • 3 regions assessed

From Evaluation to Better Programming

The value of this assignment extended beyond determining whether the youth employment initiative had achieved its objectives.

By combining a matched comparison group, propensity score analysis, qualitative research, and cost-effectiveness analysis, B.I.M. Corporation helped the donor move from “What happened?” to the more important questions:

What changed?

Employment and income outcomes were measurably stronger among program beneficiaries.

Why did it change?

Qualitative research helped identify the mechanisms and program components contributing to successful outcomes.

What should happen next?

Evidence on program effectiveness and cost-effectiveness informed the design and prioritization of the successor intervention.

Strategic Value

The evaluation provided the client with an evidence base that could support three critical functions:

ACCOUNTABILITY Demonstrating measurable results to donors and stakeholders.

LEARNING Identifying which interventions and implementation mechanisms generated the strongest outcomes.

DECISION-MAKING Using evidence to shape future program design, investment priorities, and funding proposals.

B.I.M. Corporation's Role

B.I.M. Corporation brought together impact evaluation, field research, statistical analysis, qualitative inquiry, and quality assurance within a single integrated evaluation process.

The result was an assessment designed not merely to report outcomes, but to establish credible evidence about program contribution, drivers of impact, and implications for future investment.

Evidence → Attribution → Learning → Action

A rigorous evaluation is most valuable when its findings continue to influence decisions long after the final report is delivered.