Let Girls Learn

Let Girls Learn
Official White House Photo by Chuck Kennedy · Public domain · source
Name	Let Girls Learn
Founded	2015
Founders	Barack Obama Michelle Obama
Headquarters	Washington, D.C.
Focus	Girls' education, adolescent empowerment
Parent organization	United States Agency for International Development; Peace Corps; United States Department of State

Let Girls Learn was a United States government-led initiative launched in 2015 by Barack Obama and Michelle Obama to expand access to secondary education for adolescent girls worldwide. The initiative mobilized multiple agencies including the United States Agency for International Development, the Peace Corps, and the United States Department of State to coordinate programming with partners such as UNICEF, UNESCO, and bilateral donors. It aimed to leverage diplomatic, development, and civic tools to address barriers faced by girls in diverse settings including conflict-affected regions, rural districts, and urban slums.

Background

Let Girls Learn emerged amid heightened international attention following events and campaigns involving figures and institutions like Malala Yousafzai, the Global Partnership for Education, and the United Nations General Assembly debates on the Sustainable Development Goals. The initiative was shaped by policy discussions in venues such as the G7 Summit, reports from the World Bank, and advocacy from civil society organizations like Plan International and Save the Children. Domestic politics in the United States Congress affected funding pathways, while implementation drew on models tested by entities including USAID Frontlines, Peace Corps Volunteers, and the U.S. African Development Foundation.

Goals and Objectives

The program articulated objectives aligned with multilateral frameworks promulgated at forums such as the UNESCO World Conference on Education for Sustainable Development and the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women. Core goals included boosting secondary school completion rates in countries such as Afghanistan, Nigeria, Kenya, Guatemala, and Nepal; addressing factors identified in research by the World Health Organization and the Population Council; and creating enabling environments highlighted by actors like Girls Not Brides and the International Rescue Committee. Objectives included policy reform promoted through partnerships with ministries such as the Ministry of Education (Kenya), capacity building for institutions like district education offices, and community engagement mirroring approaches used by Girl Effect and Camfed.

Programs and Initiatives

Operational components combined discrete activities drawn from programming elsewhere: scholarship funds similar to mechanisms used by the Global Partnership for Education, school infrastructure projects reminiscent of World Bank investments, and behavior-change communications modeled after campaigns by UNICEF and Girl Up. The initiative supported interventions including vocational training collaborations with UN Women, school safety measures paralleling efforts by the Global Partnership to End Violence Against Children, and menstrual health programs echoing work by PATH and WaterAid. Implementation used delivery channels involving Peace Corps Volunteers, USAID missions in countries like Ethiopia and Bangladesh, and project management practices comparable to those of Chemonics International and FHI 360.

International Partnerships and Funding

Let Girls Learn relied on a network of bilateral and multilateral partners, aligning with institutions such as UNICEF, UNESCO, the World Bank, and regional actors like the African Union. Philanthropic contributors included organizations similar to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and private-sector partners akin to Nike Foundation collaborations on girls’ programming. Funding mechanisms channeled resources via appropriations approved by the United States Congress, grant-making by USAID, and cooperative agreements with NGOs such as CARE International, World Vision, and Plan International. Implementation often interfaced with donor coordination platforms like the Global Partnership for Education and country-level education sector plans supported by the International Monetary Fund and the European Union.

Criticism and Controversy

Scholars and advocacy groups raised questions similar to critiques leveled at prominent initiatives involving foreign aid reform and high-profile advocacy campaigns. Critics compared outcomes to evaluations of programs run by entities such as USAID and the World Bank, highlighting concerns about sustainability, measurement, and the risk of short-term visibility projects echoing controversies around initiatives tied to the White House or presidential branding. Debates referenced evidence syntheses from organizations like the Overseas Development Institute and evaluations by independent auditors similar to the Government Accountability Office. Some commentators from think tanks such as the Center for Global Development and Brookings Institution emphasized the need for systemic reforms in national systems like Ministry of Finance (Nigeria) budgeting and local governance, rather than stand-alone initiatives.

Impact and Outcomes

Assessments drew on country-level indicators tracked by UNESCO Institute for Statistics, World Bank datasets, and USAID monitoring reports. Reported outcomes included increased enrollment and retention in targeted districts in countries comparable to Nepal and Kenya, community engagement improvements mirroring results from Camfed case studies, and scaling of menstrual health interventions similar to models validated by UNICEF. Independent evaluations referenced methodologies employed by the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation and outcome metrics aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals. Long-term impact narratives compared progress against benchmarks used by the Global Partnership for Education and the World Bank’s Human Capital Project, while implementation lessons informed subsequent programming by agencies such as USAID and civil society partners including CARE International.

Category:International development