Pratiques éducatives des parents d’enfants ayant un TDA/H : le point de vue des parents et d’un observateur

Cette thèse s’intéresse à la mesure des pratiques éducatives et à leur capacité à rendre compte de ces pratiques. Notamment, la sensibilité des instruments à rendre compte des changements dans les pratiques éducatives suite à un programme d’entraînement aux habiletés parentales est abordée tout en tenant compte des facteurs déterminants de ces pratiques. Le corps de cette thèse est composé de deux articles. L’objectif de la première étude consiste à comparer deux instruments de mesure fréquemment utilisés pour mesurer les pratiques éducatives. Les deux instruments, comparés sur la base de données empiriques, sont le Parenting Practices Interview (PPI), un instrument développé afin de mesurer les changements suite au programme d’entraînement aux habiletés parentales Ces Années Incroyables, et l’Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ). Le premier s’adresse aux parents d’enfants de 3 à 8 ans alors que le second cible les parents d’enfants d’âge scolaire. Cent vingt parents ont complété le PPI et l’APQ. Des analyses corrélationnelles, une analyse en composante principale et des corrélations canoniques ont été utilisées afin de comparer les différentes pratiques mesurées par ces deux instruments. Les résultats indiquent que ces deux instruments mesurent sensiblement les mêmes pratiques parentales. Quelques sous-échelles du PPI ne sont pas mesurées par l’APQ et représentent des pratiques éducatives additionnelles. Puisque ces deux instruments mesurent sensiblement les mêmes pratiques, le choix du questionnaire devrait être fait en fonction de l’objectif de l’étude (p.ex. évaluer l’efficacité du programme Ces Années Incroyables ou non), de la facilité d’utilisation de l’instrument et de l’âge des enfants. Le deuxième article a pour objectif d’évaluer les changements dans les pratiques éducatives suite à la participation des parents à un programme d’entraînement aux habiletés parentales (PEHP) à l’aide d’une grille d’observation spécifiquement développée dans le cadre de ce projet. De plus, cette étude vise à identifier les facteurs modérateurs du changement dans les pratiques éducatives telles certaines caractéristiques de l’enfant et des parents. Soixante-dix-sept familles ayant un enfant de 6 à 9 ans avec un trouble du déficit d’attention/hyperactivité (TDA/H) ont été retenues pour cette étude. Les familles ont participé soit au PEHP, soit elles ont reçu du soutien téléphonique (ST), ou elles ont continué à recevoir les services dans la communauté. Les pratiques éducatives ont été évaluées avant et après l’intervention à l’aide d’une mesure observationnelle. Les résultats indiquent que seuls les parents ayant participé au PEHP utilisent davantage de pratiques positives et ont diminué les pratiques sévères et négatives suite à l’intervention. De plus, le sous-type de TDA/H, la présence ou non de comorbidité chez l’enfant et le cumul de risque à l’intérieur d’une famille, calculé à partir de caractéristiques des parents, ne modèrent pas le changement suite à l’intervention. Cette étude démontre donc la capacité de la mesure observationnelle à détecter des changements suite à l’intervention de même que l’efficacité du PEHP auprès des familles d’enfants d’âge scolaire ayant un TDA/H.

Programme d’intervention pour les parents d’enfants autistes âgés de 2 à 6 ans

Au cours des dernières années, plusieurs programmes d’intervention ont été bâtis, afin de répondre aux besoins particuliers des enfants autistes. Une composante importante de ces interventions devrait être la guidance parentale. Ce volet permet aux parents de se sentir plus compétents et les enfants peuvent généraliser leurs acquis au quotidien. Ce mémoire a donc pour but d’évaluer un programme d’intervention pour les parents d’enfants autistes au cours duquel ils recevront des connaissances sur les particularités de leur enfant et seront appelés à participer à des activités spécifiques favorisant des interactions plus centrées sur les besoins de leur enfant. Le protocole quasi expérimental avec un pré et un post test avec un groupe de contrôle non équivalent a été utilisé pour évaluer les effets de ce programme. L’échantillon pour cette étude est constitué de 14 familles, lesquelles ont été distribuées dans les groupes en fonction de leur arrivée dans le programme. Les parents et l’enfant ont participé à une séance hebdomadaire individuelle pendant cinq semaines. Des outils standardisés ont été utilisés avant et après l’intervention pour mesurer l’atteinte des objectifs. Tant pour les parents que pour les enfants, les deux groupes ont montré une amélioration significative ou une tendance à l’amélioration lors du post test, mais cette amélioration n’était pas significativement différente entre les deux groupes. Plusieurs variables non contrôlées peuvent expliquer ces résultats, malgré tout ceux-ci sont assez intéressants pour encourager la poursuite d’études sur le sujet.

Lien bidirectionnel entre des caractéristiques personnelles des parents et leurs pratiques parentales dans un contexte d’intervention

Les parents d’enfants aux prises avec un trouble déficitaire de l’attention avec ou sans hyperactivité (TDA/H) sont à risque de dépression. Ces parents rapportent aussi des relations familiales plus problématiques, des expériences plus stressantes, un sentiment d’auto-efficacité plus faible à l’égard de leur rôle parental et des pratiques parentales plus coercitives ou inadéquates en comparaison aux parents d’enfants sans ce diagnostic. Plusieurs recherches ont relevé que les parents d’enfants ayant un TDA/H qui ont participé à un programme d’entraînement aux habiletés parentales (PEHP) rapportent une amélioration générale des difficultés énumérées précédemment. Le changement d’attitude et de pratiques parentales est souvent relié à une diminution des symptômes du TDA/H chez les enfants. L’intervention peut donc contribuer à améliorer la condition du parent et par le fait même celle de son enfant. Toutefois, le TDA/H est un trouble chronique qui peut affecter certaines caractéristiques personnelles du parent pouvant interférer avec la capacité de ce dernier à bénéficier d’une intervention. Peu d’études s’attardent aux caractéristiques du parent pouvant affecter l’efficacité de l’intervention. Le but de la présente étude est d’étudier le lien bidirectionnel entre certaines caractéristiques personnelles (dépression, stress, sentiment d’auto-efficacité) et les pratiques parentales dans un contexte d’intervention qui s’adresse aux parents d’enfants ayant un TDA/H. Les résultats démontrent que le sentiment d’auto-efficacité initial du parent est prédicteur d’une discipline inconstante, et ce, indépendamment de la condition expérimentale. De plus, les pratiques positives initiales sont prédicteurs d’un sentiment d’auto-efficacité élevé au post-test et ce, indépendamment de la condition expérimentale.

Mieux comprendre le sentiment de filiation chez les parents qui accueillent un enfant en vue de l'adopter par le biais du programme québécois Banque-mixte

Devenir parent en accueillant un enfant en vue de l’adopter en contexte de protection de la jeunesse, dans le cadre du programme Banque-mixte, est une expérience particulière, puisque l’enfant arrive dans la famille sans aucune garantie qu’il pourra être adopté. Également, les parents Banque-mixte, en tant que famille d’accueil, ont l’obligation d’amener l’enfant à des visites avec ses parents d’origine et doivent composer avec la présence d’intervenants dans leur vie privée. À l’aide d’une démarche de théorisation enracinée, la présente étude vise à comprendre comment le parent Banque-mixte développe son sentiment de filiation, c’est-à-dire le sentiment d’être le parent de l’enfant qu’il accueille, alors qu’il n’est ni le parent légal, ni le parent biologique. Des entrevues semi-dirigées ont été réalisées avec 25 parents afin d’aborder des thèmes tels que les motivations sous-jacentes à leur projet parental, l’expérience du processus pour devenir une famille Banque-mixte et la relation avec l’enfant. Les résultats permettent de jeter les bases d’une nouvelle théorie, selon laquelle le sentiment de filiation précède la filiation légale dans ces circonstances. Ainsi, le parent Banque-mixte ne devient pas un parent au moment du jugement d’adoption; il le devient bien avant, à partir du moment où il atteint un point de non-retour, c’est-à-dire où il constate de manière rationnelle ou émotionnelle que cet enfant est le sien. En l’absence d’un lien de sang et d’un lien légal, le parent Banque-mixte construit son sentiment de filiation sur la base de son profond désir d’enfant et de trois piliers qui lui permettent de justifier son sentiment d’être le parent, soit l’exercice du rôle parental, la construction d’une relation significative avec l’enfant, ainsi que la reconnaissance par autrui de son rôle de parent. Lorsque le parent Banque-mixte n’est pas confronté à l’incertitude de voir l’enfant retourner dans son milieu d’origine, il doit patienter en attendant la concrétisation de l’adoption, mais l’absence de filiation légale ne remet pas en question son sentiment d’être le parent. Par contre, le fait de se sentir le parent avant de le devenir légalement peut générer des tensions dans l’expérience du parent Banque-mixte, puisque le statut de famille d’accueil est en dissonance avec le sentiment de filiation. Afin de minimiser les effets indésirables de l’incertitude, les intervenants de l’adoption et de l’enfant développent différentes stratégies pour rassurer et protéger les parents Banque-mixte, en plus de minimiser l’inquiétude quant à la probabilité du retour de l’enfant dans son milieu familial d’origine. Finalement, guidés par leur besoin de vivre leur filiation de manière exclusive, les parents Banque-mixte font l’effort de mettre à distance les parents d’origine, tout en conservant une certaine ouverture uniquement dans le but de permettre à l’enfant d’intégrer sainement ses origines. En conclusion, les retombées pour l’avancement des connaissances, l’amélioration des pratiques et l’élaboration de nouvelles législations sont discutées.

Pratiques éducatives des parents d’adolescents présentant un TDAH : perception des parents et des adolescents en lien avec les comportements à risque

La présente étude vise à examiner d’une part le lien entre les pratiques éducatives rapportées par la mère et celles perçues par son adolescent ayant un trouble déficitaire de l’attention avec ou sans hyperactivité (TDAH) et examiner le lien avec l’adoption de comportements à risque chez l’adolescent (délinquance et association aux pairs déviants). Cinq pratiques éducatives ont été étudiées de manière distincte, soit l’engagement parental, les pratiques positives, la discipline inconstante, la faible supervision ainsi que la punition corporelle. Chacune d’entre elles a été mesurée par la mère, son adolescent et une variable de désaccord a ensuite été créée. L’échantillon est composé de 32 dyades mère-adolescent ayant participé cinq ans auparavant au programme Ces Années Incroyables. Les adolescents ont tous un diagnostic de TDAH et sont âgés entre 10 ans et 15 ans. Les résultats démontrent une absence de corrélation entre chacune des pratiques éducatives rapportées par la mère et celles perçues par l’adolescent. La mère tend à avoir une perception plus positive des pratiques éducatives que son adolescent. Les résultats démontrent aussi que la perception de l’adolescent sur les pratiques éducatives est associée à la compréhension des comportements à risque. Finalement, la perception de l’adolescent s’est avérée être un facteur aggravant de la relation entre l’ampleur du désaccord mère adolescent et l’association aux pairs déviants. La discussion explique ces résultats et aborde les importantes implications cliniques.

La relation entre les cognitions sociales des parents, les pratiques parentales et les caractéristiques comportementales de l'enfant ayant un TDAH

À ce jour, plusieurs études se sont penchées sur l’influence des comportements problématiques des enfants présentant un trouble déficitaire de l'attention avec ou sans hyperactivité (TDAH) sur les pratiques parentales (Chronis-Tuscano et al., 2008), mais peu de recherches se sont intéressées à la relation entre ce que pensent les parents et la façon dont ils se comportent avec leur enfant (Rudy & Grusec, 2006). L’objectif principal de cette thèse est d’étudier la relation entre les cognitions sociales des parents, les pratiques parentales et les caractéristiques comportementales de l’enfant présentant un TDAH. Une première étude examine la relation entre les cognitions sociales des parents (attributions causales, sentiment d’auto-efficacité parental (SAEP)), les caractéristiques comportementales de l’enfant (sous-type TDAH, symptômes concomitants) en lien avec les pratiques parentales utilisées. Cent dix familles dont l’enfant a un TDAH ont participé à l’étude. Les résultats indiquent que plus les parents ont un SAEP élevé, plus ils rapportent employer une discipline appropriée, une discipline verbale positive, des félicitations/récompenses et moins ils rapportent utiliser une discipline sévère/inconstante ou la punition physique. Les résultats montrent également que l’attribution des comportements de désobéissance de l’enfant soit à l’effort important du parent, soit au manque d’effort de l’enfant joue un rôle prédicteur en regard respectivement de l’utilisation d’une discipline verbale positive ou de l’utilisation d’une discipline sévère et inconstante par le parent. Par ailleurs, le fait de percevoir des symptômes d’opposition chez l’enfant TDAH prédit l’utilisation d’une discipline appropriée et d’une discipline verbale positive. Enfin, la présence de symptômes concomitants au TDAH prédit l’utilisation d’une discipline sévère et inconstante. L’objectif de la seconde étude est d’examiner le rôle des cognitions sociales des parents d’enfant ayant un TDAH en lien avec les pratiques parentales utilisées après leur participation à deux types d’intervention (programme d’entraînement aux habiletés parentales (PEHP) ou soutien téléphonique (ST)) comparativement à un groupe contrôle (GC). Les résultats suggèrent que dans certains cas, le SAEP ou les attributions causales prédisent différemment les pratiques parentales selon que les parents ont ou non participé à une intervention, mais il est prématuré de conclure que les cognitions sociales des parents d’enfant TDAH sont des modérateurs du changement des pratiques parentales. Les implications méthodologiques, conceptuelles et cliniques de ces deux études sont discutées.

Programme de suivi de deuil pour des parents ayant un enfant décédé dans une unité de soins intensifs pédiatriques

Travail dirigé présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures et postdoctorales en vue de l’obtention du grade de Maîtrise ès sciences (M. Sc.) en sciences infirmières, option expertise-conseil

Évaluation de l’efficacité d’un programme d’entraînement parental pour les parents d’enfants souffrant d’anxiété de séparation

Le trouble d’anxiété de séparation (TAS) est le trouble anxieux le plus prévalent chez les enfants. Il apparaît tôt et entraîne plusieurs conséquences négatives. La thérapie cognitivo-comportementale (TCC) a été reconnue efficace pour traiter les troubles anxieux. Toutefois, peu d’études ont vérifié son efficacité pour le traitement spécifique du TAS et très peu en ont examiné l’effet auprès d’enfants de moins de 7 ans. Les quelques interventions étudiées visant les moins de 7 ans ont en commun d’inclure le parent dans le traitement ou de l’offrir directement à celui-ci. L’objectif principal de cette thèse est de vérifier l’efficacité d’un programme d’entraînement parental de type TCC, adapté pour les parents d’enfants de 4 à 7 ans souffrant de TAS. Cette étude vise également deux objectifs spécifiques : observer la fluctuation des symptômes de TAS de l’enfant pendant le traitement et examiner l’impact du programme sur les variables parentales. Un devis à cas unique à niveaux de base multiples a été utilisé. Six familles ont pris part à l’étude. Des entrevues semi-structurées, des questionnaires auto-administrés et des calepins d’auto-observations quotidiennes ont été utilisés auprès des parents pour mesurer les symptômes anxieux des enfants, leurs pratiques parentales, le stress parental et leurs symptômes anxieux et dépressifs. Des questionnaires sur les difficultés de l’enfant incluant l’anxiété ont aussi été envoyés à l’éducatrice ou à l’enseignante. Tous les questionnaires ont été administrés aux trois temps de mesure (prétraitement, post-traitement et relance 3 mois). Les calepins d’auto-observations ont été remplis quotidiennement durant le niveau de base, pour toute la durée de l’intervention et pendant une à deux semaines à la relance. Les résultats de l’étude indiquent que cinq enfants sur six ne répondent plus au diagnostic de TAS suite au traitement ainsi que trois mois plus tard. Les résultats des calepins d’auto-observations montrent une amélioration claire des manifestations principales de TAS pour la moitié des enfants et plus mitigée pour l’autre moitié, de même qu’une amélioration systématique de la fréquence hebdomadaire totale de manifestations de TAS suite à l’intervention pour quatre enfants. Les résultats aux questionnaires remplis par les parents montrent une amélioration des symptômes d’anxiété et de TAS chez quatre enfants au post-test et/ou à la relance, tandis que les questionnaires de l’éducatrice (ou enseignante) suggèrent que les symptômes anxieux des enfants se manifestaient peu dans leur milieu scolaire ou de garde. L’impact du programme sur le stress parental et les pratiques parentales est également mitigé. Ces résultats suggèrent que le Programme d’entraînement parental pour les enfants souffrant d’anxiété de séparation (PEP-AS) est efficace pour réduire les symptômes de TAS chez les enfants d’âge préscolaire ou en début de parcours scolaire et appuient la pertinence d’offrir le traitement aux parents et d’inclure un volet relationnel. D’autres études seront cependant nécessaires pour répliquer ces résultats auprès d’un plus vaste échantillon. Il serait également intéressant de vérifier les effets indépendants des différentes composantes du traitement et d’évaluer les effets du programme sur davantage de pratiques parentales associées spécifiquement à l’anxiété.

L’implication des parents de jeunes contrevenants au sein du programme de suivi intensif différencié dans la communauté du Centre jeunesse de Montréal-Institut universitaire

Rapport de stage présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l’obtention du grade de Maîtrise ès science (M.Sc.) en criminologie option intervention clinique

Don’t aim too high for your kids: parental over-aspiration undermines students’ learning in mathematics

Previous research has suggested that parents’ aspirations for their children’s academic attainment can have a positive influence on children’s actual academic performance. Possible negative effects of parental over-aspiration, however, have found little attention in the psychological literature. Employing a dual-change score model with longitudinal data from a representative sample of German schoolchildren and their parents (N = 3,530; grades 5 to 10), we showed that parental aspiration and children’s mathematical achievement were linked by positive reciprocal relations over time. Importantly, we also found that parental aspiration that exceeded their expectation (i.e., over-aspiration) had negative reciprocal relations with children’s mathematical achievement. These results were fairly robust after controlling for a variety of demographic and cognitive variables such as children’s gender, age, intelligence, school type, and family SES. The results were also replicated with an independent sample of US parents and their children. These findings suggest that unrealistically high parental aspiration can be detrimental for children’s achievement.

CGIAR research program on grain legumes

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background and context The Grain Legumes CRP was established to bring all research and development work on grain legumes within the CGIAR system under one umbrella. It was set up to provide public goods outcomes to serve the needs of the sustainable production and consumption of grain legumes in the developing world, capitalising upon their properties that enhance the natural resource base upon which production so unequivocally depends. The choice of species and research foci were finalised following extensive consultation with all stakeholders (though perhaps fewer end users), and cover all disciplines that contribute to long-lasting solutions to the issues of developing country production and consumption. ICRISAT leads Grain Legumes and is partnered by the CGIAR centers ICARDA, IITA and CIAT and a number of other important partners, both public and private, and of course farmers in the developed and developing world. Originally in mid-2012 Grain Legumes was structured around eight Product Lines (PL) (i.e. technological innovations) intersecting five Strategic Components (SC) (i.e. arranged as components along the value chain). However, in 2015, it was restructured along a more R4D output model leading to Intermediate Development Outcomes (IDOs). Thus five Flagship Projects (FP) more closely reflecting a systematic pipeline of progression from fundamental science, implementation of interventions and the development of capacity and partnerships to promote and adopt impactful outcomes: FP1) Managing Productivity through crop interactions with biotic and abiotic constraints; FP2) Determination of traits that address production constraints and opportunities; FP3) Trait Deployment of those traits through breeding; FP4) Seed Systems, post-harvest processing and nutrition; FP5) Capacity-Building and Partnerships. Another three cross-cutting FPs analyse the broader environment surrounding the adoption of outputs, the capitalising of investments in genomics research, and a focus on the Management and Governance of Grain Legumes: FP6) Knowledge, impacts, priorities and gender organisation; FP7) Tools and platforms for high throughput genotyping and bioinformatics; and FP8) Management and Governance. Five FPs focus on R4D; FPs 5 and 6 are considered cross-cutting; FP 7 has a technical focus and FP 8 has an overarching objective. Over the three year period since its inception in July 1012, Grain Legumes has had a total budget of $140 million, with $62M originally to come from W1/W2 and the remaining $78M to come from W3/bilateral. In actuality only $45M came from W1/W2 but $106M from W3/bilateral corresponding to 106% of expectation. Purpose, scope and objectives of the external evaluation Principally, the evaluation of Grain Legumes is to ensure that the program is progressing in an effective manner towards addressing the system-level outcomes of the CGIAR as they relate to grain legumes. In essence, the evaluation aims to provide essential evaluative information for decision-making by Program Management and its funders on issues such as extension, expansion and structuring of the program and adjustments in relevant parts of the program. Subsequent to the formal signing of the agreed terms of reference, the evaluation team was also invited to comment upon the mooted options for merging and/or disaggregating of Grain Legumes. The audiences are therefore manifold, from the CGIAR Fund Council and Consortium, the Boards of Trustees of the four component CGIAR centres, the Grain Legumes Steering, Management and Independent Advisory Committees, to the researchers and others involved in the delivery of R4D outcomes and their partner organisations. The evaluation was not only summative in measuring results from Grain Legumes at arm’s length; it was also formative in promoting learning and improvements, and developmental in nurturing adaption to transformational change with time. The evaluation report was written in a manner that allows for engagement of key partners and funders in a dialogue as to how to increase ownership and a common understanding of how the goals are to be achieved. We reviewed research undertaken before the CRPs but leading to impacts during Grain Legumes, and research commenced over the past 2.5 years. For related activities pre- and post-commencement of Grain Legumes, we reviewed the relevance of activities and their relation to CGIAR and the Grain Legumes goals, whether they were likely to lead to the outcomes and impacts as documented in the Grain Legumes proposal, and the quality of the science underpinning the likelihood to deliver outcomes. Throughout, we were cognisant of the extent of the reach of CGIAR centres’ activities, and those of stakeholders upon which the impact of CGIAR R4D depends. Within our remit we evaluated the original and modified management and governance structures, and all the processes/responsibilities managed within those structures. Besides the evaluation of the technical and managerial issues of Grain Legumes, we addressed cross-cutting issues of gender sensitivity, capacity building and the creation and nurturing of partnerships. The evaluation also has the objective to provide information relating to the development of full proposals for the new CRP funding cycle. The evaluation addressed six overarching questions developed from the TOR questions (listed in the Inception Report, 2015 [http://1drv.ms/1POQSZh] and others including cross-cutting issues, phrasing them within the context of traditional evaluation criteria: 1. Relevance: Global development, urbanisation and technological innovation are progressing rapidly, are the aims and focus of Grain Legumes coherent, robust, fit for purpose and relevant to the global community? 2. Efficiency: Is the structure and effectiveness of leadership across Grain Legumes developing efficient partnership management and project management across PLs? 3. Quality of science: Is Grain Legumes utilising a wide range of technologies in a way that will increase our fundamental understanding of the biology that underpins several PLs; and are collected data used in the most effective way? 4. Effectiveness: Are Product Lines strategic contributors to the overarching aims and vision for Grain Legumes? 5. Impact: Are the impact pathways that underlie each PL well defined, measureable and achievable; and are they sufficiently defined in terms of beneficiaries? Does progress towards achieving outputs and outcomes from the major research areas indicate a lasting benefit for CGIAR and the communities it serves? 6. Sustainability: Is Grain Legumes managing the increasing level of restricted funding in terms of program quality and effectiveness, including attracting and retaining quality staff? Questions for the evaluation of governance and management focused on accountability, transparency, the effectiveness and success of program execution, change management processes and communication methods, taking account of the effects of CGIAR reform. The three crosscutting issues were considered as follows: i) gender balance in program delivery, e.g. whether each PL is able to contribute to the increased income, food security, nutrition, environmental and resource conservation for resource-poor women and men existing in rural livelihoods; ii) are internal and external capacity gaps identified/met, is capacity effectively developed within each product line, and are staff at all levels engaged in contributing ideas towards capacity building; and iii) is there effective involvement of partners in research and activity programming, what are the criteria for developing partnerships, how they are formalised and how is communication between partners and within Grain Legumes managed? It was not in remit to search for output, outcomes or impact, however as highlighted later, much of our time was spent on searching for information to support claims of impact, since Grain Legumes had no effective dedicated M&E in place at the time of undertaking the review. Approach and methodology The evaluation was conducted when Grain Legumes had been operational for approximately 3 years. The approach and methodology followed that outlined in the Inception Report [http://1drv.ms/1POQSZh]. The CCEE Team based its findings, conclusions and recommendations on data collection from several sources:  review of program documents, communications with the CO, minutes and presentations from all management and governance committee meetings  review of previous assessments and evaluations  sampling of Grain Legume projects in 7 countries1  more than 66 face to face interviews, a further 133 persons in groups and 4 phone/Skype conversations: ICRISAT, ICARDA, CIAT and IITA staff, partners and stakeholders. Meetings with one Independent Science and Partnership Council (ISPC) member.  meetings with over 100 people in 16 external groups, such as farmers’ groups  online survey completed by 126 (33.4%) scientists who contribute to Grain Legumes and a number of non-CGIAR partners and Management representatives  bibliometric review of 10 publications within each PL to qualitatively assess the design, conduct, analysis and presentation of results  quantitative and qualitative self-assessment of the contributions of each of the PLs to the six criteria and 3 cross-cutting issues of evaluation mentioned above completed by PLCs (see below). We reviewed the Logical Framework that underpins the desired Goals, or Impacts of Grain Legumes, and the links between the outputs and inputs as they related to the organisational units of Grain Legumes. The logical framework approach to planning and management of Grain Legumes activities implies a linear process, leading from activities, outputs, outcomes, to impacts, but within such an approach there may be room for a more systems dynamics approach allowing for feedback at every step and within every step, in order to refine and improve upon the respective activities as new results, ideas, and directions come to light. We then developed a matrix that summarised quantitatively and qualitatively the contributions of each of the PLs to the six criteria and 3 cross-cutting issues of evaluation mentioned above. Main findings and conclusions Grain legume production and consumption remain of great importance to the food security of not inconsiderable populations in the developing world, and merit sustained research investment. We conclude that Grain Legumes continues to contribute significant returns to research investments by the CGIAR, and such investment should continue. The global research community looks to the CGIAR for leadership in Grain legumes, but needs to be assured of value adding when bringing CGIAR centres under the expected umbrella of synergy. However, there is considerable scope for improving the efficiency with which outcomes are achieved. We note that an absence of an effective M&E has hampered the assessment of the effectiveness of proposed impact pathways. Likewise progress has been hampered by the limited numbers of research partnerships with Advanced Institutes and by budgetary constraints (lamented for their stifling effects on continuation of ongoing exciting research). The unworkable management structure constrains the CRP Director’s leadership role; responsibility without authority will never lead to effective outcomes. Good fortune is responsible for many of the successes of Grain Legumes, underpinned by a devoted work force across the participating CGIAR centres and partners. The quality of the science is not uniformly high, and we believe that mentoring of scientists should be given priority where quality is poor. Simplified yet informative reporting is an imperative to this. World class science underpins the identification of, and molecular basis for, traits important for yield improvement and this expertise should be extended to all grain legume species, capitalising upon the germplasm collections. The linking of Grain Legumes with regional research and development consortia has been very successful, with outcomes aligning with those of Grain Legumes. We see that with declining funding consolidation of research effort based on likely successes will be necessary, and welcome the move afoot to incorporate grain legumes into an agri-food system focused on successful value chains that deliver sustainable outcomes. Relevance and Strategy Grain Legumes has geographic and disciplinary relevance, addressing the major supply chain issues of variety development seed system and agronomy, with some attention to quality and postharvest marketing systems. The CRP has provided the opportunity to cut ongoing and to initiate new research. Research funded by the Gates Foundation (Anon, 2014) suggests that the need for improvement is greatest in Africa and advocates reducing the number of crop by country combinations when resources are sparse. The lesser research investment in Latin America, however, is not in line with the regions’ dependency on legumes. In spite of the fact that there is no evidence of strong inter-partner CGIAR centre or internal synergy, the program is still moving ahead on most fronts in line with the overall project logframe. This is in spite of continual pushing and pulling by in particular donors and the CO. However, to quantify real impact, we believe Grain Legumes must have access to reliable baseline data on production and consumption, and this is missing. Similarly, there is little evidence of the proposed ‘Inclusive Market Oriented Development’ (IMOD) framework being used to assist with priority setting. The product lines, eight of which cover most of the historical programmes in place in the partner CGIAR centres at the commencement of the Grain Legumes, do not cover all the constraints for formal constraints analysis was not undertaken at the inception of the Grain Legumes, and some of this additionally identified research is undertaken under the umbrella of the FPs; this needs to be rationalised. We found the PLs to be isolated in activity, even with minimally-integrated activities within each PL, with little evidence of synergy between PLs. Even though the SCs should ensure a systems approach, as with the new FPs, we did not get a feel that this is so. The underplaying of agronomy, and production practices may be one reason for this. We believe that treating legume crops as if they were horticultural crops will increase farmer returns from investment. The choice of Flagship Projects makes sense, with the flow of activity firstly around crop management and agronomy followed by the logical sequence of trait discovery, incorporation into improved varieties, dissemination of those varieties through appropriate seed chains leading to market impacts, and the capacity building required at all steps. One obvious omission, however, is the lack of a central and strategic policy on the role of transgenics in Grain Legumes. We found four notable comparative advantages for Grain Legumes: the access to germplasm of component species, the use of the phenotyping facility at ICRISAT, the approach for village level industry for IPM, and the emphasis on hybrid pigeonpea. Efficiency Each centre has strong control of, and emphasis on, their ‘species’ domains, and ownership of the same detracts from possible synergy. Without synergy or value add, the Grain Legumes brings with it no comparative advantage over each centre continuing their own pre-CRP research agendas. We found little evidence of integration of programmes between centres and almost no cross-centre authorship of publications, such as could have occurred with the integrated cross-centre approaches to stress tolerance including crop modelling: the one publication (Gaur et al., 2015) on heat tolerance by ICRISAT, CIAT and ICARDA does not provide any keys to inter-centre collaboration. The integration of each centre with NARS and university research programmes is good, but the cross-centre links with NARS are poor. A better coordinated integration with Grain Legumes, , rather than through the individual centres, may reduce transactions costs for NARS, Monitoring and evaluation is, as noted throughout our report, one area of Grain Legumes research management that has not been given the attention it should have received. If it had have received proper attention, some of the issues of poor efficiency might have been nipped in the bud. A strong monitoring and evaluation system would have provided the baseline data and set the milestones that would have allowed both efficiency and effectiveness to be better appraised. We found no attempt to define comparative advantages of the CGIAR centres and their R4D activities, although practice showed the better grasp of CIAT in developing innovative seed distribution systems. During field visits and interviews, the CCEE Team observed shortcomings in the communication processes within Grain Legumes and with the broader scientific community and the public. For example, the public face of the program on the internet is out of date. Survey findings, however, suggest that information is shared freely and routinely within the PL within which scientists work. Some external issues, such as those with funding, low W1/W2 and poor sustainability of funding (especially if funding is top heavy with a few agencies), undermine research investment and confidence of partners in the system (e.g. as voiced by researchers working on crops and countries not included in TL III and the cessation of ongoing competitively-funded projects especially in India), but other issues attributable to the governance and management of the Grain Legumes, such as opaque integration of W3/bilaterals with W1/W2 funding require attention. Offsetting this, the existence of the Grain Legumes did mobilise additional funding [that it would not have if Grain Legumes did not exist]. We were concerned that Grain Legumes is simply not recognised outside of the CRP, with a limited www presence and centres promote themselves, rather than Grain Legumes (with exception in IITA). This is not a good move if one wishes to increase investment in the Grain Legumes. Although funding agencies require cost:benefit ratios, for example for each PL we faced difficulty in determining comparative value for money between investment in different types of research, and in being able to clearly attribute research and development outcomes to financial investment. There was also a time CCEE frame issue too. There is poor interaction with the private sector, notably in areas where they have a comparative financial advantage. We questioned in particular the apparent lack of interaction with the major agro-chemical companies, with respect to the development of herbicide tolerant (HT) grain legumes and the lack of evidence that the regulatory and trade aspects related to herbicide tolerant crops had been considered. Quality of science The quality of the science is highly variable across Grain Legumes, with pockets of real excellence that are linked to good levels of productivity, whereas other PLs are struggling to deliver quality publications, and outputs and outcomes that are based on these. There is much evidence of gradualism in terms of research output and outcomes, i.e. essentially the same activities that were ongoing at the time of the launch of Grain Legumes are still in place. However, there are examples of game changers including those from valuable investments in genomics, phenotyping, and bio-control. We were pleased to see large proportions of collaboration on publications with non-CGIAR centres, reflecting cooperation with partners in developed and developing countries. The value of collaboration when ensuring quality of science cannot be stressed highly enough both within the CRP, and with other global and national partners. PLs should be given incentives to collaborate with other CRPs and external institutions. There is little cohesion between PLs and with other CRPs as evidenced by publications, although there are some exceptions. We suspect the reasons for this are driven by funding. Productivity from the different PLs is also highly variable and it is not clear what other activities staff are engaged in since, in some PLs, they do not appear to lead to quality publications. Effectiveness Grain Legumes has been very effective in addressing component issues of research, but not the continuum from variety development to legumes on someone’s dinner plate. Our overall assessment of the effectiveness of Grain Legumes in stimulating synergy, innovation and impact indicate that gradualism is more prevalent than innovation. It also shows, as do publications, that there is little integration of disciplines or a focus on ‘systems’. The absence of socio-economists from research teams is evident in the general lack of an end user focus. However, research on genomics, plant breeding and seed systems have made great strides forward, on the brink of delivering impact. Agronomy has been a poor sister, but some of the competitive grants within Grain Legumes have unearthed some potential game changers, such as objective use of transplanting as an agronomic practice. As mentioned earlier, the lack of effective M&E (however, this was part of some major projects such as TL II/TL III), and therefore the ability to monitor impact pathways and achievement of impact, implies no systematic management of data. This creates difficulty when attempting to evaluate the achievement of the Grain Legumes objectives. One might have expected at least one attempt to try to develop publications between centres arguing for similar biologies/research approaches, bringing species together under one umbrella, but we did not find any evidence for this. It is most unfortunate that, due to budgetary cuts, the new ‘schemes’, e.g. competitive grants and scholarships, were cut off before gaining a foothold. With 8 species addressed by Grain Legumes, it is not unexpected that there will be little evidence of shared protocols across centres/species. One rare example was that hosted by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) on shared methods for phenotyping of legume germplasm. Researchers from CIAT, IITA, ICRISAT and three USDA stations attended, focusing in simple canopy temperature and root morphology measurements. It is our belief that as a set of research centres, the CGIAR centres should be focusing on the research for which they have a comparative advantage. While imposing the restructure to FPs, which is fine for development objectives and outcomes (funded through W3/bilateral), it is less so for a research institute, and the structure should not detract from the more basic work expected of an international CGIAR centre (or set of centres as in a CRP). Impact It is well known that research does not always lead to scientific breakthroughs. Also, activities such as plant breeding are long term; making impacts difficult to assess. We believe that sufficient progress with genomics and associated research has been made to warrant impact, but we are unable to quantify the levels of impact, or the timeframe for the same. Work in Grain Legumes has enormous potential for real impact in scientific research, commercial, farming, smallholder and household communities, much of which is being realised. However, the PLs need to become more adept at providing convincing cases that are strongly evidenced for these impacts, as this is likely to be a key factor in leveraging future funding. Claimed gains must be referenced against baseline data, and these are not always readily available. The CCEE Team realises that such impact evaluation represents a significant drain on resources, and Grain Legumes should determine whether the balance of costs to benefits favours such investment. Interviews conducted by the CCEE during site visits showed that PLs are quantifying the area of adoption of varieties, but in most cases they are not measuring the impact on environment, health/nutrition. Since the health and nutritional benefits and the environmental gains from growing legumes are major arguments for supporting grain legume research, the community is currently missing substantial opportunities to strengthen its own case for continued support. Whilst there are some impressive examples of considering the whole value chain, e.g. white beans from production through to export; in the main, the pipeline to end user is somewhat piece-meal, with no clear definition of the end user nor differential responsibility of Grain Legumes and of partners. The lack of robust time-defined impact pathways is highlighted in Section 7.4, and even though developed for PL5, timeframes are essential for measuring progress against prediction. Sustainability In summary, there is general acknowledgement that future funding is likely to become more limited, specifically in W1&2 and there is understandable concern over the support for the staff and basic infrastructure that underpin the Grain Legumes programme. For example, it is reported that staffing in parts of CIAT has been dependent on W1&2 and that this is too unstable to re-establish a critical mass. The present system whereby W3 and bilateral projects do not pay a realistic level of overheads means that such projects are being effectively subsidised by W1&2. This position is not sustainable in the long term as there will be a progressive but definite loss of basic skills and resources in the core centres. The only obvious options to prevent this outcome include a severe reduction in the fixed costs of the centres and/or a refusal to accept W3 and bilateral funding with an inadequate overhead component. In the latter case, there is an obvious danger that funders will move their resources away from the CGIAR system towards other, perhaps less expensive, suppliers of research, and possibly more relevant development expertise. This issue must be addressed. As the Grain Legumes moves into the future, and if sustainable funding cannot be assured, decisions must be made concerning a reduction in activities, keeping some caretaker breeding maintenance, and focus (as has TL III) on fewer species and a reduced geographic focus. Cross cutting issues: Gender, capacity building and partnerships Gender is not mainstreamed, but there is some evidence that this is improving, especially with dedicated gender specialists and the slow integration of gender across CRPs. There is a need to approach gender through the vision of agriculture as a social practice, with recognition of what changes will be acceptable culturally and what not, and capitalising upon the perceived and actual features of production and processing that grain legumes are primarily women-based crops. Gender awareness may be high among Scientists, but it appears to be a predominantly passive attribute with few proactively seeking opportunities for gender equity. It is, however, a sound sensitivity base on which to build. Nevertheless, examples of notable gender initiatives were identified during field visits. For example, in Benin, the development of biocontrol technologies has enthusiastically integrated diversity, engaging with women farmers’ and youths while maintaining cultural norms. Women are gathering and processing, youths are taking the product to market. The implication is that several groups benefit, rather than domination by the majority group. In Malawi, innovative approaches have been developed to improving nutrition for children, such as incorporating nutrient enriched bean flour products into snacks. In India, scientists collaborating with gender scientists and socio-economists are identifying the impact of mechanical harvesting on agricultural labour and the potential displacement of female labourers. In Kenya, a novel initiative is improving the accessibility of certified seed for new varieties. Seed suppliers have introduced small packs of grain legume seed at low unit cost, which are being purchased by young people and women. Capacity building efforts for external partners are not clearly aligned with the research mandate and delivery of Grain Legumes. However, there are a number of training activities that are being undertaken by Grain Legumes, largely through the W3/bilateral project. Gender balance never reaches parity, but it appears that efforts are made to include female participants. Within the evaluation timeframe it was not possible to conduct external surveys to further validate or review external capacity building efforts in Grain Legumes. Training of scientists is significant, with >40 benefiting. Postgraduate training is varied across PLs, and there is some opportunity to increase the numbers being supervised. We consider that support for postgraduates at ICRISAT could be better coordinated, satisfying more of the students’ needs. It is important, however, to follow up investments in capacity building by monitoring effectiveness, career progressions and so on. Training activities appear to be rather centre-specific, not following a coordinated programme managed by, nor at the level of, the Grain Legumes. Numbers of persons trained and their gender are important, but a measure of the effectiveness of the training is more important. Although optimism is expressed by the great majority of Research Managers that partnerships were working well to leverage knowledge and research capacities, scientists have a less favourable view, particularly in terms of their incentives to participate. It seems likely that the activities taking place within Grain Legumes were, in the most part, continuations of previous collaborations. This is not surprising in light of the reduction in the emphasis on partnerships as Grain Legumes evolved to a funded project, and the consequent lack of opportunity and ambition for establishing novel partnerships. Where they exist, partnerships are good on the whole, especially with US. They could be expanded where comparative advantages exist (for example with Canada and Australia for machine harvestable legumes), but some earlier identified partnerships, e.g. with Turkey, have not been capitalised upon. Others experience problems of variety access (the embargo on exports of some sources of materials from India), yet others do have relevance e.g. imported Brazilian varieties in pre-release in Ethiopia (even though two of the three are from CIAT materials). Governance and Management The standard format of committee structure and responsibilities is common to other CRPs, as are the attendant problems. One of the major problems is that the Grain Legumes Director has responsibility but no authority; hence, even with the support of the RMC, the Director is unable to ‘direct’ in the literal sense of the work the activities of Grain Legumes. We also see the same sense of helplessness with the role of the PLCs. They have responsibility but no authority in managing the affairs of their PL, and they have no access to funds with which to promote intellectual collaboration and cooperation. Minutes from governance and management meetings do not reflect the compromised weak position of the Director and the associated difficulties in the management of Grain Legumes. Nor do the minutes reflect concerns about the amount of time spent by scientists in meetings for planning, integration, evaluation and reporting. Many scientists reported significant opportunity costs in participating in the ongoing imposed [by the CO] evolution of Grain Legumes and CRPs in general. The changes brought in by the CO have not helped promote any greater authority and capacity of the Grain Legumes Director to direct. Likewise, they do not address any of the issues with the conflict of interest in having the Lead Centre chair the Steering Committee. Indeed, we believe that the combining of the Steering Committee with the Independent Advisory Committee, besides becoming unwieldy in number, annuls any sense of independence in advice offered to the Grain Legumes management. We have concerns with the declining proportion of W1/W2 funds (as expressed in the section on Sustainability), and believe that when basic financial planning takes place, integration of W1/W2 and W3/bilateral sources must occur, and be linked to anticipated outcomes and impacts. This will ensure a close alignment of collaborators’ and partners’ objectives and contributions to that of the Grain Legumes. We also queried the process for, and the formality, or lack of, surrounding, the approval of annual budgets, and the level of priority setting when budgets are cut. Recommendations for Grain Legumes The CCEE Team makes the following recommendations, critical issues are highlighted in bold, and those that require action by an entity other than the Grain Legumes Research Management Committee or Project Management united are identified in a footnote. Relevance and Strategy Recommendation 1: A period of consistency is necessary to raise confidence, morale and trust across scientists, managers and partners to foster the assembly of enduring Grain Legumes outcomes2.  There needs to be a concerted effort to undertake baseline studies and to implement a robust M&E activity during this period. Without these data the foundation for integrated research in grain legumes is jeopardised.  There is a strong need to link more closely with the private sector, especially where there are financial and other comparative advantages to do so. Recommendation 2: The agronomic and physiological trait targets of Grain Legumes (tolerance to changing climate patterns, to the pests and diseases of today and of the future, incorporation of quality traits and adaptations to intensive production systems [machine-harvestability and herbicide tolerance], and short season high yielding characters) are all worthy of continued investment when selecting for improved varieties.  There needs to be a common strategy, implemented across centres and species, as to how to address these trait targets through conventional and modern breeding approaches, but only if adequate funding is assured and secured and if a consistency and unity of purpose can be achieved across a large-scale. This should take the form of cross-species coordinated research programmes to address these breeding targets that cooperate across centres and make efficient use of facilities and other resources.  The CRP should undertake a detailed strategic review of the role of transgenics across the range of targets in the mandate crops. Efficiency Recommendation 3: The lack of an effective M&E process is a significant omission, not least in terms of more efficient use of resources and the lack of baseline data with which to measure impact, and must be rectified.  Reinforcing Recommendation 1, an effective M&E system initially directed towards baseline studies must be implemented.  Transaction costs may be reduced through bilateral projects, which are seen as more cost effective than W1/W2 where transaction costs are disproportionately higher. Recommendation 4: To improve communication and coordination within the CRP, and with a broader audience:  There is a priority need for a central database containing, names of staff associated with Grain Legumes and their time commitments, their responsibilities, and involvement in CRP activities, their progress and achievements, their publications, plans of training, travel, and other opportunities for interaction.  Regular global meetings of staff involved in managing PLs, the entire CRP management staff and the IAC are essential for effective coordination of all activity within Grain Legumes.  The website must be given a complete overhaul and improvement and then regular maintenance must be provided to keep it current. Quality of Science Recommendation 5: It is essential to continue investment in good science and to institute a change from gradualism in research output and outcomes to an expectation of innovative and concrete achievements that can be attributed clearly to people, centres and core facilities.  A cost:benefit analysis and subsequent strategic planning must be undertaken to justify further investment in the genomics and phenotyping facilities at ICRISAT especially as such technologies advance rapidly. Strategic planning and coordination must also be implemented for capitalising on the investment in crop simulation modelling. (The phenotyping facility of ICRISAT needs to focus on delivering some outcomes, not only outputs.)  PLs should be given incentives to collaborate with other CRPs and external institutions. The CCEE recommends special recognition of high quality collaborative papers, thereby encouraging increased quality of the research programmes and widening the penetration of research impacts.  More importance should be placed on the quality of publication, rather than quantity of outputs and there should be recognition of other types of outputs from Grain Legumes. The CRP Director must be party to this.  If staff are engaged in activities that relate more to impact than publication then this needs to be monitored and recorded and a clearer understanding developed of what constitutes a pathway to impact and how success of such activities can be evaluated. A system must be devised and incorporated into the M&E to enable recognition of other types of outputs (non- publication based) from Grain Legumes, e.g. varieties for breeders. Effectiveness Recommendation 6: To develop greater synergy, Grain Legumes should review management processes and the direction of research activities. In particular, far more extensive integration of research and knowledge exchange should take place across both African and Asian continents so that the best aspects of both can be shared. A multidisciplinary approach is recommended that considers processing solutions, as well as breeding solutions, to capitalise upon the nutritional benefits of the grain legume crops. We recommend:  A better collaboration with social scientists at the design stage of experiments in order to improve the utility of the work carried out and to understand its reach.  Supporting3 the adoption of best practice electronic data collection, central storage and open access, particularly of genomic data, for public use.  Given the focus on the link between phenotyping and genotyping, we note that there is a lack of congruence between the populations that are being phenotyped and those being genotyped, and therefore these could be better aligned within each species.  Concentrating investment external to Grain Legumes on scaling up production of varieties with the most promising trait profiles to meet the basic seed requirement.  Developing a more holistic approach that coordinates an understanding of the disease pathology and epidemiology, and of new chemicals before they become commercially available, together with agronomic practice such that recommendations can be made for growers. Continuing work to establish whether agronomic factors hold true in different environments and to assess GxE effects within breeding programmes. Such rigorous trial practices should be used to inform the evaluation of breeding lines and to provide phenotype data to associate with markers for traits such as heat, drought and herbicide tolerance.  Considering grain legumes as if they were vegetable crops in terms of the strategy for intensification of production, both from the management perspective and for seed systems, will be a useful development objective into the future. This will bring about more rapid intensification and is likely to increase farmer returns from investment. Recommendation 7: The CGIAR centres should focus in on the research for which they have a comparative advantage. While imposing the restructure to FPs, which is fine for development objectives and outcomes (funded through W3/bilateral) it is less so for a research institute, and should not detract from the more basic work expected of an international CGIAR centre (or set of centres in a CRP).  Collaborative approaches should be explored within Grain Legumes, e.g. similar biologies/research approaches, bringing species together under one umbrella. Similarly better alignment is needed to address the lack of congruence between the populations that are being phenotyped and those being genotyped.  Despite positive impacts from research in genomics, plant breeding and seed systems, the lack of an effective M&E, already mentioned elsewhere, has reduced the ability to monitor impact pathways. This must be addressed.  The absence of socio-economists from research teams is evident in the general lack of an end user focus. Responsibilities of the different actors in the whole value chain must be considered and identified when developing impact targets, and the pathway leading to them, for individual projects. People with socio-economist skills must be part of the team from project inception so that appropriate frameworks are incorporated for measuring and influencing sociological and economic changes brought about by Grain Legumes research. Impact Recommendation 8: PLs need to become more adept at providing convincing cases in which impact is strongly evidenced, as this is likely to be a key factor in leveraging future funding.  Claimed gains must be referenced against baseline data, and these are not always readily available. The CCEE Team realises that such impact evaluation represents a significant drain on resources, and Grain Legumes should determine whether the balance of costs to benefits favours such investment.  It is essential that Grain Legumes provides training to staff on what constitutes impact and how it can be recorded.  Specific, rather than generalised, potential impacts arising from activity within Grain Legumes should be defined at the time of justifying the programme of work and a pathway to impact should form part of the documentation prepared ahead of a piece of research commencing. . In other words, centres should submit work plans to Grain Legumes before they are undertaken using W1/W2 funds Recommendation 9: The reporting activity must be streamlined to a single (brief) format that can be used to report to Grain Legumes, Centres and to donors for special project activities4. Sustainability Recommendation 10: As Grain Legumes moves into the future, and if sustainable funding cannot be assured, decisions must be made concerning a reduction in activities, keeping some caretaker breeding maintenance, and focus (as has TL III) on fewer species and a reduced geographic focus. Zeigler (Director General of IRRI) states “…time and effort would be better spent … making tough decisions about which programs deserve the precious support.”  The present system whereby W3 and bilateral projects do not pay a realistic level of overheads means that such projects are being effectively subsidised by W1&2 and there will be a progressive but definite loss of basic skills and resources in the core centres. To prevent this outcome it is necessary to significantly reduce the fixed costs of the centres and/or refuse to accept W3 and bilateral funding without an adequate overhead component.  In the absence of long term certainty, the scale of the budget allocated to each of the new CRPs should be very conservative, a feature that can only be achieved by restricting/reducing the scope, probably quite significantly. Cross cutting issues: Gender, capacity building and partnerships Recommendation 11: The challenge for Grain Legumes is to achieve pro-active gender mainstreaming, which facilitates opportunities for gender diversity within all activities, from employment processes through research to end users.  Strategic measurable gender indicators need to be embedded in research design, for instance, through specific IDOs for each of the flagships projects. Accurate baseline data are also required to facilitate M&E reviews of progress.  Implementation of the Gender Strategy is the responsibility of everyone, not solely the Gender Team. Thus, ownership could be encouraged by setting personal development for key personnel objectives with specific outcomes, e.g. employment practices or research outcomes.  Recognising the positive gender initiatives in progress or planned, feedback must be communicated and integrated into broader research planning to share opportunities, methods and outcomes.  In addition to promoting gender equity in research, Grain Legumes also needs to ensure that working environments are gender sensitive and that recruitment processes, including promotion opportunities are equitable. Gender imbalance in management should be actively examined to identify further opportunities for developing female leadership. Recommendation 12: It is recommended that a training plan be devised to ensure that capacity building efforts are more clearly aligned with the research mandate, delivery and timeframe of Grain Legumes. Moreover, we recommend that ICRISAT develop a strategy to treat their new cohort of researchers more equitably in the future. Recommendation 13: To develop a more coherent strategic programme designed to eliminate overlap and promote synergy between programmes with common aims, Grain Legumes should hold a meeting with a range of partners. Governance Recommendation 14: Governance processes should be re-assessed and the structure altered to ensure that the Grain Legumes Director has the authority and budget control to drive the execution of strategy.  The ISC should be truly independent and given the power to influence strategic decisions before they become final. We also recommend that PLCs are provided with the authority to manage the direction and finances of their PL; and that ring-fenced funds are provided for the promotion of collaboration, coordination and staff training5. The way ahead In our view, having seen the ineffectiveness of much of the attempts [or lack of attempts] to harness synergies between multiple centres, and of the strength in few or sole centre partnerships, we believe that there is little to justify a full retention of the 8 legume species and 4 CGIAR centres in a CRP. TL I and II and PABRA have shown to be reasonably good cross-centre and single centre integrated programmes, but even they suffer from incomplete value chain approaches to increasing rural incomes while increasing food and nutritional security; they both need multi-faceted solutions which are not immediately forthcoming from Grain Legumes. It is important to embed Grain Legumes research within the agri-food systems these crops serve. Figure ES1 broadly shows the perceived current and potential degrees of synergy between centres, PLs and species, and is discussed more in the text. It is clear that the value chains for individual species from trait determination to nutritional impact have more cohesion than do the individual activities (e.g. trait deployment) across species. For this reason we believe that the future for research in Grain Legumes is best addressed by focusing on each of the species separately, and within an ecosystem framework; any synergy for research across species can be effected through communication and not necessarily through obligatory cooperative research. The ecosystem framework will allow for strengthening of agronomy type systems research, the arguments for benefits of inclusion of grain legumes in cropping systems, which is notable by its absence in much of what Grain Legumes currently undertakes. Figure ES1. Current and potential degrees of synergy between centres, PLs and crop species We therefore agree with the innovation in agri-food systems approach of the CG, and believe that Grain Legumes rightly belongs in the Dryland Cereals and Legumes Agri-food Systems. We believe that the option of combining the crops of dryland cereals and legumes in the cereal-legume-livestock systems of subsistence farming communities for whole-farm productivity is closest to the best way forward. Indeed the inclusion of grain legumes may not warrant even a CRP alone, rather the legume components should fit in with the major crops that determine the production systems. Legumes will always be subservient to the major cereals, as necessary adjuncts to the whole production system, providing both nutritional diversity and environmental services, neither achievable from cereals alone. Figure ES2. Most suitable option for integration of Grain Legumes and Dryland Cereals into an Agri-Food Systems CRP Most suitable option for integration of Grain Legumes and Dryland Cereals into an Agri-Food Systems CRP, which  Incorporates ex-Dryland Systems, Dryland Cereals, Grain Legumes, some HumidTropics, some ex-Livestock &Fisheries into a new CRP  Will cover full agri-food system VC for all 8 legumes in all ecologies, but must interact (dock) with the relevant AFS-CRPs for the dominant cereal in the relevant ecology  Hence, will need to negotiate with other Agrifood Systems-CRPs on who does what for legumes  In addition, responsible for sorghum and millet in the mixed dryland crop-livestock agro-ecologies For major game changers to be effected, we believe that the game has to change, and there is little evidence of this. The direction of CRPs is the correct route, but the journey has not yet come to its destination. A major change of game [such as the adoption of a Flagship Project approach as exemplified by the Australian CSIRO – where flagships contract services from centres of research excellence] would be painful to implant. The CGIAR system is going down the right pathway but it has not gone far enough.

Growth of transcendental meditation: a sociological study

Sociology, in concerning itself with methodology and cultural determinism,may have overlooked the value of human experience in determining social action. We feel that the structural-functionalist point of view is not mutually exclusive with that of symbolic interaction theory. The field of collective behavior has not adequately explained a certain incidence of human activity called Transcendental Meditation. This paper will define Transcendental Meditation in sociological terms and explore its growth in terms of structural-functionalism,as well as in terms of the symbol-making faculty of human experience. In the first chapter, the author will state his biases and background as well as the problem and purpose of the paper. In the second chapter, Transcendental Meditation will be defined through an explanation of its concepts in sociological terms. A view of the TM program will also be reported. Following this in the third chapter, the origins of TM will be discussed~showing its basis to be in a tradition of Indian gurus and following its development in the United states until the present. The history of TM will proceed through biography of leading figures, with special mention of innovations in the TM institution of teaching and events in the growth of the 'movement' of TOO that are of key importance. Having set down the history of TM, in the fourth chapter we will discuss TM in terms of various sociological models. We will try to identify TM as either a social movement; a charismatic organization or a bureaucracy. In the fifth chapter we will look more closely at the structure of the organization that teaches TM in regard to its own functioning; that is, compliance, communication, socialization and recruitment, and also in regard to its relationship with national institutions, such as military, industry, religion, and government. Finally, we will explore TM in terms of individual and group goals and offer an explanation defining the growth of TM. Throughout-the paper, sociological perspectives will be applied to phenomena that exist in the society today. It is not within the scope of this paper to verify all the sociological implications and appraisals offered. It is hoped that this will not invalidate the ensuing discussion. It is also hoped that this paper will expand the horizons of sociology and offer some direction in future studies of collective behavior. If this is accomplished, the author will be gratified and indebted to his teachers. If not the author takes full responsibility. This paper is dedicated therefore to Mr. Birge, Mr Morrione, Mr. Geib as well as to my parents who have encouraged me, my friends whom I have interviewed, and to His Holiness, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi whose teaching has uplifted hundred of thousands of people in the world and may bring about the development of new thresholds of peace and prosperity for mankind.

Histologia e morfometria das glândulas das junções infundíbulo-magno e útero-vagina de codorna doméstica

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Avaliação das características de afetividade em crianças e jovens com síndrome de down

This work presents the processes and the results of a research concerning the affectivity in children suffering from the Down´s Syndrome (DS). The relevance of the study is justified due to the need of the development of researches, in the area of psychological evaluation of people who suffers from Down´s Syndrome (DS), that are backed by the use of appropriate instruments for such purpose. The thematic discussed focuses the characteristics of the affectivity of children suffering from Down´s Syndrome. Affectivity, conceptually, is considered a wide phenomenon, including several aspects such as emotions, passions, anxiety, anguish, sadness, happiness and even the pleasure sensations and pain. The general objective of the study consisted of investigating the manifestation of the affectivity in children and young with Down´s Syndrome and the parents´ and educators´ perception concerning the expression of the affectivity in the behavior and in the social activities. The specific objectives were: to identify the parents' perceptions about the several manifestations of indicative behaviors of affectivity; to verify in the social atmosphere, outside home, through the teachers' perception, the several forms and intensities of the expression of the affectivity; and, to make possible the use of the technique of Zulliger (Z-test) in people with Down´s Syndrome. 70 (seventy) children and young with Down´s Syndrome participated in the research, in the age group from 04 to 26 years old, which are attended by Institutions of Paraíba and of Rio Grande do Norte. The instruments used were two questionnaires, applied with the parents and teachers, and the projective technique, Z-test, applied, individually, with the children and young with Down´s Syndrome. For analysis of the data of the questionnaires, the program Trideux-Mots was used, with the intention of selecting the main outstanding words for the parents and teachers concerning the expression of the children's affectivity and young with Down´s Syndrome. For so much, it was organized a database that was processed by that program and, soon after, interpreted through the Factorial Analysis by Correspondence (AFC), looking for to clear the modalities of presented answers in an organized way, through a graph. The data of the Z-test were analyzed, taking in consideration the need to characterize the aspects of the affectivity and the elaboration of specific norms for this sample type, through normalized scores. In agreement with the data presented by Tri-deux-Mots, it was observed that in the affective behavior and in the relationship with the other, home and in the school, the children and young with Down´s Syndrome they express your affectivity through positive and negative characteristics, in the same way that any other child that doesn't have to syndrome. The Z-test made possible initial elements to work with that population, however it is necessary that grow other researches with the intention of investigating the reason of the answers they present not the specific categories that you/they are related to the affectivity, since it was well-known the diversity of affective characteristics presented by the researched group

Effects of broiler breeder genetic, diet type, and feeding program on maternal antibody transfer and development of lymphoid tissues in chicken progeny

Maternal antibody (MatAb) transfer is important for early chicken survivability. Diet composition and the amount of feed given to breeder pullets during rearing may affect the development of immunity and the transfer of MatAb to progeny, and could affect progeny performance and resistance to disease. The effects of broiler breeder nutrition and feeding management practices were evaluated for the transfer of MatAb to progeny and for spleen and bursa development at hatching in 2 genetic strains (A and B). In this experiment, the levels of MatAb against Newcastle disease virus were assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays in serum samples taken of pedigreed chicken progeny from hatching to 13 d of age. Chickens were fed corn-and wheat-based diets, as were their parents. The breeder feeding program and diet type altered the Newcastle disease virus MatAb found in progeny at hatching and affected how long these antibodies were maintained in circulation. Bursal follicle size at hatching was influenced by an interaction among all factors evaluated. Percentage of white pulp in the spleen was affected mainly by genetic strain and diet type, but responses varied according to the breeder feeding program. It was concluded that breeder feeding programs influence MatAb transfer and half-life, and may also affect the early development of lymphoid tissues.