LiA Reflection: Week 4

My fourth week in London with S&FW in London.

Jiyon Chatterjee Apr 11, 2026

1. What Went Well?

This week marked a shift in my project from conceptual and field-based learning to a deeper engagement with how S&FW captures and structures its data in practice.

Alongside continuing my work building out the longitudinal framework and evidence database, I met with Lindsay Huxter, S&FW’s Operations Coordinator, who oversees the collection and management of data across the twelve schools in which Family Group operates. This conversation was particularly important for my project, as it grounded my thinking in the realities of what data already exists, how it is collected, and how it might be extended into a longer-term framework.

I approached this meeting with two main questions in mind. First, from a methodological perspective: what baseline and in-programme data does SFW already collect that could be used to construct a meaningful before–after–long-term comparison? Second, from a more strategic perspective: how can this data be translated into the kinds of clear, measurable outcomes that funders are looking for?

One of the most striking aspects of SFW’s data collection is the use of individual, self-defined goals for each student. Rather than imposing a uniform set of metrics, students and families identify specific areas they want to improve—whether related to behaviour, relationships, or engagement—and progress is tracked over the course of the programme. This creates a highly personalised dataset that reflects the diversity of challenges families face, while still allowing for measurable change within each case.

I found this approach particularly compelling because it aligns closely with the ethos of Family Group itself: change is relational and context-specific, rather than standardised. At the same time, it raised an important question for my project: how can this highly individualised data be meaningfully extended into a long-term evaluation framework? One possibility I began to explore is whether these self-set goals could serve as anchors for future follow-up—allowing families to reflect on whether the progress they made during Family Group has been sustained over time.

Another important insight from reviewing the data was the distinction between parent-reported and student-reported measures. While both are valuable, student-reported data appeared to exhibit greater variance, which may reflect differences in age, emotional awareness, or interpretation of questions. This has implications for how we think about reliability and consistency in a longitudinal study, and reinforced the earlier decision—shaped by Clinical Governance—to focus follow-up engagement primarily on parents.

I also spent time working directly with SFW’s data spreadsheets to understand how information is currently organised. At present, much of the data is structured at the school or cohort level within a given year, rather than being aggregated across multiple years or sites. While this works well for internal monitoring and individual programme delivery, it limits the organisation’s ability to present a broader, system-level picture of impact.

This raised an important opportunity: by aggregating data across schools and over time, SFW could begin to demonstrate not only individual-level change, but also the scale and consistency of need being addressed. This is particularly relevant for funders, who often look for evidence that an intervention is not only effective, but also scalable and capable of addressing systemic challenges.

As part of this process, I began identifying key variables within the datasets that could be useful for a future longitudinal study. These included:

categories of student goals
measures of progress over time
demographic indicators
and indicators related to school engagement and behaviour

This exercise helped bridge the gap between the conceptual framework I have been developing and the practical data infrastructure already in place.

What I am most proud of this week is that I feel I have started to connect three strands of the project more concretely:

the ethical framework for longitudinal follow-up
the qualitative insights from fieldwork and parent engagement
and the quantitative data already collected by the organization

Bringing these together is essential if the final output is to be both theoretically sound and practically useful.

2. What Could Have Been Done Differently?

This week also highlighted some challenges in how I am approaching the project.

One area for improvement is the need to more clearly define which data is essential versus supplementary. As I explored the spreadsheets, it became easy to become overwhelmed by the volume and granularity of information available. While much of this data is valuable, not all of it will be equally useful for a longitudinal study or for communicating impact to funders.

In hindsight, I could have approached the data review with a more structured set of criteria—for example, focusing specifically on variables that:

align with the outcome domains in my framework
are consistently collected across schools
and can be meaningfully compared over time

I also realised that I need to think more carefully about the trade-off between complexity and clarity. While the richness of SFW’s data is a strength, translating that into clear, compelling narratives for external audiences will require simplification. Developing that balance—between preserving nuance and achieving clarity—is an ongoing challenge.

Finally, I recognized that I could have engaged earlier with the question of data aggregation. While I had been thinking primarily about individual trajectories, this week made it clear that organisational impact is often communicated at a higher level. Integrating these two perspectives—individual and aggregate—will be important moving forward.

3. Leadership Reflection (3Cs Model)

Values

This week, the values of Curiosity and Ambition were particularly prominent. Curiosity drove my exploration of how SFW collects and uses data, while ambition shaped my desire to connect this data to a broader, long-term evaluation framework.

There was also a subtle tension between ambition and practicality. While it is tempting to design a comprehensive and sophisticated system, it must ultimately be grounded in what is feasible for the organisation to implement.

Character

This week required patience and attention to detail. Working through datasets and operational systems is less immediately visible than fieldwork or workshops, but it is equally important for building something that is robust and credible.

Judgment was important in deciding how to interpret the data—particularly in recognising its strengths without overextending what it can currently support.

Capacities

The main capacity I developed this week was analytical thinking—specifically, the ability to interpret data not just in isolation, but in relation to broader organisational goals.

I also began to develop my capacity to think in terms of systems and infrastructure, rather than individual interactions. Understanding how data flows through the organisation, and how it can be adapted or extended, is central to the success of the project.

4. Ethical Engagement

This week reinforced that ethical engagement extends beyond direct interaction with participants to include how their data is collected, interpreted, and presented.

The use of self-defined goals is a powerful example of how SFW centres participant agency within its data collection. However, it also raises important questions about how this data is used in aggregate. There is a responsibility to ensure that individual experiences are not reduced to overly simplistic metrics when presented to external audiences.

I also became more aware of the ethical implications of data aggregation. While aggregated data can be valuable for demonstrating impact, it must be handled carefully to avoid obscuring the diversity and complexity of individual experiences.

Overall, this week highlighted that ethical considerations are embedded not only in what data is collected, but in how it is used and communicated.

5. Adjustment & Development for Next Week

Next week, I will focus on integrating the data insights from this week into the longitudinal framework.

Specifically, I plan to:

identify a core set of variables that can be consistently tracked over time
explore how self-defined goals can be incorporated into long-term follow-up
and begin drafting a funder-facing summary of categorized impact, using both qualitative and quantitative evidence

In terms of personal development, I want to strengthen my ability to translate complex data into clear, compelling insights, particularly for external audiences.

A concrete action I will take is to create a prototype data summary that demonstrates how S&FW’s existing data could be aggregated and presented to illustrate long-term impact.