1. Introduction

Adolescent pregnancy is one of the most persistent barriers to girls’ education in sub-Saharan Africa. The United Nations Population Fund reports that more than 12 million girls aged 15–19 become mothers each year in low- and middle-income countries, with significant consequences for their health, economic mobility and educational pathways [1].

Rwanda has been a continental leader in gender parity in education, and its Education Sector Strategic Plan and successive National Strategies for Transformation treat gender equity, inclusive education and learner retention as strategic priorities [2, 3]. Nevertheless, the 2025 Demographic and Health Survey found that 8% of girls aged 15–19 had ever been pregnant, up from about 5% in the 2019/20 survey [4], and recent studies indicate that most teenage mothers who leave school do not successfully return [5, 6].

To respond, government agencies and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in Rwanda have implemented back-to-school initiatives that help teenage mothers re-enter formal education.

Gasabo District, in Kigali City, is a revealing setting in which to study them. It combines urban and semi-urban conditions with a large youth population, and it hosts programs run by both the district administration and NGOs.

Research in the district shows that stigma, weak psychosocial support and the absence of targeted re-entry support from schools and families continue to shape teenage mothers’ educational prospects [7], and evidence from Ghana similarly identifies stigma and discrimination as significant obstacles to school re-entry [8].

Whether a girl enrolls is therefore decided not only by her own circumstances but by the attitudes and actions of many actors: her family, community leaders, school administrators and teachers, programme staff and district officials.

From a project management perspective, these actors are project stakeholders, and engaging them is a core implementation task.

Stakeholder Theory holds that project outcomes depend on the quality of relationships maintained with all parties who can influence or be affected by a project’s goals, not only its primary beneficiaries [9].

The Project Management Body of Knowledge identifies stakeholder engagement as a foundational process of project implementation [10], and Pinto and Slevin’s Project Implementation Theory lists client consultation among the ten critical success factors of project implementation [11].

Research on international development projects has likewise sought to identify the implementation factors and conditions on which success depends [12, 13].

In Rwanda, community support has been identified as a mediating factor between structural barriers and school reintegration, with supportive communities increasing, and stigmatizing communities reducing, the probability that an adolescent mother returns to school [5].

Despite this, existing Rwandan research on school re-entry has concentrated on the causes of teenage pregnancy and the barriers that girls face [5, 7], and the few studies of implementation in Rwandan education projects have examined resource planning in donor-funded projects rather than back-to-school programs for teenage mothers [14].

Empirical evidence on how the engagement of families, community leaders, schools and programme staff affects the enrolment of teenage mothers in a specific district such as Gasabo is limited. The only district-specific case study identified drew on five participants [7].

This study addresses that gap.

It reports the first objective of a wider investigation of four project implementation strategies: to examine the effect of stakeholder engagement strategies on the enrolment of teenage mothers in back-to-school programs in Gasabo District.

The corresponding null hypothesis (H₀₁), that stakeholder engagement strategies have no significant effect on the enrolment of teenage mothers, was tested.

As detailed in the sections that follow, the null hypothesis was rejected. Stakeholder engagement was strongly and positively associated with enrolment (r = .591) and was the strongest predictor of programme success when the other three strategies were held constant (β = .312), although engagement was rated only moderately overall and community-level engagement was its weakest element.

2. Materials and Methods

This study adopted a mixed-methods approach built on a descriptive survey design [15].

The quantitative strand established the strength and direction of the relationship between stakeholder engagement and enrolment, while the qualitative strand, comprising key informant interviews and focus group discussions (FGDs), contextualized and explained the mechanisms through which that relationship operates.

The study covered back-to-school programs implemented by the district government and NGOs in Gasabo District, Kigali City, between 2020 and 2025.

2.1. Study Population and Sampling

The target population comprised five groups directly involved in or affected by back-to-school initiatives in Gasabo District:

Teenage mothers who had participated in programs between 2020 and 2025, approximately 320;

Teachers and school administrators in schools hosting re-entry programs, approximately 85;

District education officers and Ministry of Education programme staff, approximately 15;

NGO programme managers and field staff, approximately 20; and

Parents or guardians of beneficiaries, approximately 200.

The total estimated population was approximately 640 people, based on national statistics, ministry data and NGO program records.

The sample size was determined using the Krejci and Morgan formula [16] at the 95% confidence level (χ² = 3.841), a population proportion of 0.5 and a 5% margin of error.

This yielded 241 respondents distributed proportionally across the five strata. A 10% attrition buffer raised the number of questionnaires distributed to 265.

Table 1. Target Population, Questionnaires Distributed and Response Rate by Respondent Category

Teenage mothers
Population: 320
Distributed: 130
Returned: 116
Response Rate: 89.2%

Teachers and school administrators
Population: 85
Distributed: 35
Returned: 32
Response Rate: 91.4%

District education officers and MINEDUC staff
Population: 15
Distributed: 15
Returned: 15
Response Rate: 100.0%

NGO programme managers and field staff
Population: 20
Distributed: 20
Returned: 20
Response Rate: 100.0%

Parents/guardians of beneficiaries
Population: 200
Distributed: 65
Returned: 58
Response Rate: 89.2%

Total
Population: 640
Distributed: 265
Returned: 241
Response Rate: 91.0%

Source: Primary Data (2026). Population figures are estimates from national statistics, ministry data and NGO records.

Stratified random sampling across the sectors of Gasabo District was used to select teenage mothers and parents or guardians.

Simple random sampling was used to select teachers and school administrators from the list of schools hosting re-entry programs.

Purposive sampling was used to select district education officers, NGO programme managers and key informants with direct knowledge of programme implementation.

For the qualitative strand, 12 key informants — district education officers, NGO managers and school heads — were purposively selected.

Two FGDs of eight teenage mothers each were also conducted, with participants chosen to reflect diversity in age, place of residence and programme experience.

2.2. Data Collection Instruments

The primary quantitative instrument was a structured questionnaire developed in English and translated into Kinyarwanda for accessibility.

It comprised respondent profile items and Likert-scaled sections measuring the four project implementation strategies, with four items each, and the success of the back-to-school initiative, also with four items.

All substantive items used a five-point Likert scale:

1 = Strongly Disagree
2 = Disagree
3 = Neutral
4 = Agree
5 = Strongly Agree

The stakeholder engagement section, which is the focus of this paper, contained four items:

Family members were involved and informed about the programme.

Community leaders supported and encouraged return to school.

School administrators were welcoming and supportive during re-entry.

Programme staff regularly communicated with all parties involved.

Enrolment of teenage mothers was assessed through the re-enrolment dimension of the programme success section.

Qualitative data were collected through a semi-structured interview guide for key informants and an FGD guide for teenage mothers.

These explored respondents’ experiences of programme implementation, the most effective strategies, difficulties faced, and suggestions for improvement.

With informed consent, interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, and the researcher moderated the FGDs with the assistance of a qualified research assistant.

2.3. Validity and Reliability

Content validity was established through expert review by two subject-matter specialists from the University of Kigali’s School of Science and Technology.

They evaluated the instrument for clarity, relevance and appropriateness of the Likert items.

Their feedback led to the rewording of four ambiguous items and the removal of one redundant item.

The questionnaire was then pilot-tested with 24 respondents, approximately 10% of the final sample, drawn from a back-to-school programme in Kicukiro District outside the main study area.

Pilot respondents were excluded from the final sample.

Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranged from .77 to .85 across the five constructs, with an alpha of .79 for the stakeholder engagement scale and .81 for the overall instrument.

All values exceeded the .70 minimum threshold recommended by Kothari [15].

Table 2. Reliability Statistics of the Research Instrument, Pilot Test, n = 24

Stakeholder Engagement
Number of Items: 4
Cronbach’s α: .79
Decision: Accepted

Resource Allocation
Number of Items: 4
Cronbach’s α: .83
Decision: Accepted

Communication Strategy
Number of Items: 4
Cronbach’s α: .77
Decision: Accepted

Monitoring and Evaluation Mechanisms
Number of Items: 4
Cronbach’s α: .80
Decision: Accepted

Programme Success
Number of Items: 4
Cronbach’s α: .85
Decision: Accepted

Overall Instrument
Number of Items: 20
Cronbach’s α: .81
Decision: Accepted

Source: Primary Data (2026). Decision rule: accept where α ≥ .70.

2.4. Data Analysis

Completed questionnaires were edited, coded, entered into SPSS Version 26 and cleaned for errors and missing values.

Descriptive statistics, including means, standard deviations, frequencies and percentages, summarized the sample and the stakeholder engagement indicators.

The indicators were interpreted using the following conventional bands:

1.00–1.80 = Very Low
1.81–2.60 = Low
2.61–3.40 = Moderate
3.41–4.20 = High
4.21–5.00 = Very High

Pearson correlation assessed the bivariate relationship between stakeholder engagement and enrolment.

Multiple linear regression estimated the independent effect of stakeholder engagement on programme success alongside the other three implementation strategies.

The model was specified as:

Y = β₀ + β₁X₁ + β₂X₂ + β₃X₃ + β₄X₄ + ε

Where:

Y = Success of back-to-school initiatives
X₁ = Stakeholder engagement
X₂ = Resource allocation
X₃ = Communication strategy
X₄ = Monitoring and Evaluation mechanisms
β₀ = Constant
β₁ to β₄ = Regression coefficients
ε = Error term

Multicollinearity was assessed by examining inter-correlations among the independent variables.

Statistical significance was set at p < .05.

Qualitative data from the interviews and FGDs were analyzed thematically following the six-phase approach of Braun and Clarke [17], with triangulation against the quantitative results conducted at the interpretation stage.

2.5. Ethical Considerations

This study was conducted in compliance with the University of Kigali Graduate Research Guidelines (2023) and internationally recognized research ethics principles.

Research permits were obtained from the University of Kigali Graduate School, the Gasabo District Administration and relevant school and NGO authorities before data collection.

All participants were informed of the purpose, procedures and potential risks of the study and of their right to withdraw at any time without penalty.

Written consent was obtained from adult participants.

For teenage mothers who were minors, assent was obtained from the participant together with written consent from a parent or legal guardian.

Identifying information was removed from data records.

Data were stored on password-protected devices accessible only to the researcher and supervisor.

Questions on sensitive issues such as sexual violence, family rejection and stigma were framed carefully, with participants showing signs of distress referred to counselling services.

3. Results

The quantitative strand yielded 241 completed questionnaires from the 265 distributed, representing a 91.0% response rate.

Response rates were 100% among district officers and NGO staff and between 89.2% and 91.4% in the other groups.

Teenage mothers formed the largest group of respondents at 48.1%, followed by parents or guardians at 24.1%, teachers and school administrators at 13.3%, NGO staff at 8.3%, and district education officers and ministry staff at 6.2%.

Among the 116 teenage mother respondents:

42.2% were aged 18–20 years.

30.2% were aged 21–24.

19.0% were below age 18.

8.6% were age 25 or older.

More than half, 52.6%, had completed lower secondary education, S1–S3, before dropping out.

24.1% had completed primary education.

23.3% had completed upper secondary education, S4–S6.

Twelve key informant interviews and two FGDs were also conducted.

3.1. Descriptive Statistics of Stakeholder Engagement

Table 3 summarizes respondents’ ratings of the four stakeholder engagement indicators.

The overall mean score was 3.39 (SD = 0.99), indicating a moderate level of stakeholder engagement across back-to-school programs in Gasabo District.

The ratings reveal an uneven picture.

School administrators being welcoming and supportive during re-entry was the highest-rated indicator (M = 3.65, SD = 0.92, High), followed by the involvement and information of family members (M = 3.42, SD = 0.98, High).

Regular communication by programme staff with all parties (M = 3.31, SD = 1.01) and community leaders’ support and encouragement of return to school (M = 3.18, SD = 1.04) were rated Moderate.

Dispersion was smallest for school administrators and largest for community leaders, indicating that experiences of community leader support varied most widely across respondents.

Engagement was therefore strongest where it was institutionalized in schools and weakest at the community level.

Table 3. Descriptive Statistics of Stakeholder Engagement Indicators, N = 241

Family members were involved and informed about the programme
N: 241
Mean: 3.42
Standard Deviation: 0.98
Interpretation: High

Community leaders supported and encouraged return to school
N: 241
Mean: 3.18
Standard Deviation: 1.04
Interpretation: Moderate

School administrators were welcoming and supportive during re-entry
N: 241
Mean: 3.65
Standard Deviation: 0.92
Interpretation: High

Programme staff regularly communicated with all parties
N: 241
Mean: 3.31
Standard Deviation: 1.01
Interpretation: Moderate

Overall Stakeholder Engagement
N: 241
Mean: 3.39
Standard Deviation: 0.99
Interpretation: Moderate

Source: Primary Data (2026).

3.2. Correlation Analysis

Table 4 presents the Pearson correlation matrix.

Stakeholder engagement was positively and significantly correlated with enrolment and programme success at the .01 level (r = .591, t(239) = 11.33, p < .001), representing a large association by Cohen’s conventional benchmarks, where small = .10, medium = .30 and large = .50.

Stakeholder engagement was the strongest correlate of programme success among the four implementation strategies.

Resource allocation produced r = .548.

Communication strategy produced r = .523.

Monitoring and Evaluation mechanisms produced r = .487.

The coefficient of determination, R² = .349, indicates that stakeholder engagement alone accounted for approximately 34.9% of the variance in enrolment, leaving 65.1% to be explained by other factors.

Stakeholder engagement correlated moderately with the other three strategies, from r = .355 to .402.

Inter-correlations among all four strategies ranged from .334 to .409, indicating that the strategies are related but empirically distinct enough to be entered together in a single regression model without problematic multicollinearity.

Table 4. Pearson Correlation Matrix among Study Variables, N = 241

SE with RA: .402**
SE with CS: .378**
SE with M&E: .355**
SE with PS: .591**

RA with CS: .361**
RA with M&E: .334**
RA with PS: .548**

CS with M&E: .409**
CS with PS: .523**

M&E with PS: .487**

Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level, 2-tailed. N = 241 for all pairs.

SE = Stakeholder Engagement
RA = Resource Allocation
CS = Communication Strategy
M&E = Monitoring and Evaluation Mechanisms
PS = Programme Success

3.3. Multiple Regression Analysis

Multiple linear regression tested the independent effect of stakeholder engagement on programme success while holding the other three implementation strategies constant.

The model was highly significant overall:

R = .827
R² = .684
Adjusted R² = .679
Standard Error of the Estimate = .312
F(4, 236) = 127.71
p < .001

The four strategies jointly explained 68.4% of the variance in programme success.

The small gap between R² and Adjusted R² indicates that the model is not overfitted.

Stakeholder engagement emerged as the strongest predictor.

Table 5. Regression Coefficients

Dependent Variable: Programme Success

Constant
B: .421
Standard Error: .187
t: 2.251
Significance: .025

Stakeholder Engagement
B: .348
Standard Error: .071
Beta: .312
t: 4.901
Significance: .000

Resource Allocation
B: .319
Standard Error: .074
Beta: .287
t: 4.311
Significance: .000

Communication Strategy
B: .271
Standard Error: .075
Beta: .241
t: 3.613
Significance: .000

Monitoring and Evaluation Mechanisms
B: .224
Standard Error: .076
Beta: .198
t: 2.947
Significance: .003

Source: Primary Data (2026).

Model:

R = .827
R² = .684
Adjusted R² = .679
SE = .312
F(4, 236) = 127.71
p < .001

The fitted model was:

Y = 0.421 + 0.348X₁ + 0.319X₂ + 0.271X₃ + 0.224X₄

The fitted model indicates that, holding the other three strategies constant, each one-point improvement in stakeholder engagement is associated with a 0.348-point gain in programme success.

This was the largest unstandardized effect of the four strategies, compared with 0.319 for resource allocation, 0.271 for communication strategy and 0.224 for M&E mechanisms.

In standardized terms, the effect of stakeholder engagement (β = .312) was approximately 1.6 times that of M&E mechanisms (β = .198).

3.4. Hypothesis Testing

Using the significance of the correlation and regression coefficient at the .05 level, the null hypothesis was rejected.

Stakeholder engagement strategies have a statistically significant, positive effect on the enrolment of teenage mothers in back-to-school programs in Gasabo District (r = .591, p < .001).

The effect remained significant when the other three implementation strategies were controlled (β = .312, p < .001), answering the first specific objective of the study.

Table 6. Summary of Hypothesis Testing Decision

Hypothesis: H₀₁: Stakeholder engagement strategies have no significant effect on the enrolment of teenage mothers in Gasabo District.

Test Statistic: r = .591, t = 11.33
Significance: .000
Decision: Rejected

Multivariate Check: H₀₁: Stakeholder engagement has no independent effect on programme success when the other three strategies are controlled.

Test Statistic: β = .312, t = 4.901
Significance: .000
Decision: Rejected

Source: Primary Data (2026).

Decision rule: Reject H₀ where p < .05.

3.5. Qualitative Triangulation

Findings from the key informant interviews and FGDs triangulated closely with the quantitative results.

The most consistent theme was the decisive role of parental and family support in motivating teenage mothers to re-enrol.

An NGO programme officer explained that “when the family is on board, the girl comes back,” whereas when a family is ashamed or unsupportive, “even if we enroll her, she drops out within weeks.”

The officer described family sensitization as the most important thing the organization does before a girl steps through the school gate.

FGD participants described the same mechanism from the girl’s side.

One explained that her mother, afraid of what the neighbors would say, changed her mind after a programme officer visited their home and explained the programme, adding that without that visit she would not be in school today.

Home visits and family sensitization sessions were therefore identified as the most impactful engagement strategies, consistent with the strong association between engagement and enrolment.

A district education officer reported that community leader engagement had improved through Umudugudu, or village-level, sensitization meetings, but emphasized that coverage remained incomplete across Gasabo’s 15 sectors.

This corresponds to the lowest-rated quantitative indicator, community leader support, which had a mean score of 3.18.

No major divergence between the quantitative and qualitative data was identified.

4. Discussion

Stakeholder engagement strategies were strongly and positively associated with the enrolment of teenage mothers (r = .591, R² = .349) and were the strongest of the four implementation strategies in explaining programme success (β = .312, p < .001) within a model that jointly accounted for 68.4% of its variance.

This finding provides direct empirical support for the central proposition of Stakeholder Theory [9] that project outcomes depend on the quality of relationships maintained with all parties who can influence or be affected by the project, not only with its primary beneficiaries.

In this setting, the decisive parties were not only the teenage mothers themselves but their families, community leaders, school administrators and programme staff.

The result is also consistent with Pinto and Slevin’s identification of client consultation as a critical success factor of project implementation [11] and with the treatment of stakeholder engagement as a foundational implementation process in the PMBOK Guide [10].

The qualitative evidence suggests how engagement works.

Family acceptance acted as a precondition for enrolment.

Where families were informed, visited and persuaded, opposition softened and girls returned.

By contrast, enrolment without family acceptance was fragile and ended in early withdrawal.

This is consistent with evidence from rural Rwanda that adolescent mothers in communities with strong social support networks, positive attitudes toward girls’ education and active parental involvement had significantly higher school reintegration rates than those in communities characterized by stigma and exclusion [5].

It is also consistent with evidence from Ghana that stigma and discrimination are significant obstacles to school re-entry [8].

The accounts of participants whose mothers changed their minds after a home visit also resonate with Mezirow’s view that meaningful educational re-engagement involves a change in frame of reference [18].

Although this study did not measure learning processes, the pattern suggests that engagement may work partly by shifting how families view a young mother’s educational prospects, a proposition that future research could test directly.

The pattern of ratings adds nuance.

Engagement was rated best where it was institutionalized in schools, with school administrators receiving M = 3.65, and worst at the community level, where community leaders received M = 3.18.

Direct communication by programme staff was also only moderate, with M = 3.31.

The gap matters because evidence from Rwanda indicates that the attitudes of community leaders are a key determinant of school reintegration outcomes [5].

It also shows that the practice with the greatest influence on outcomes is not yet consistently delivered: moderate average engagement coexists with a strongest-predictor status.

The qualitative accounts of incomplete Umudugudu-level coverage across Gasabo’s 15 sectors indicate that community outreach has so far been uneven.

The results suggest that outreach and family engagement should be ongoing, structured processes embedded throughout the project lifecycle, as the stakeholder engagement guidance in the PMBOK Guide implies [10], rather than one-off sensitization events.

Set against related Rwandan evidence, the strength of the association, r = .591, is comparable in magnitude to the correlation of .654 reported between resource planning practices and project performance in donor-funded education projects [14].

Within the present joint model, however, stakeholder engagement outranked resource allocation, β = .312 compared with β = .287.

This qualifies a common assumption that funding is always the first lever for improving school re-entry.

Both mattered, but how well families and communities were engaged mattered slightly more.

By examining engagement within a social development project, the study also extends the project management literature on implementation factors in development projects [12, 13] to the specific problem of teenage mothers’ school re-entry.

For practice, the results give implementing organizations a defensible basis for sequencing effort.

Engagement of families and community leaders should be treated as an early and continuing work package of a back-to-school project, completed before enrolment and sustained after it.

The limitations of the evidence should nonetheless be acknowledged.

The design was cross-sectional and the measures were the perceptions of respondents drawn from five groups, so the results show association and prediction rather than proof of causation.

Social desirability may also have influenced the ratings, particularly those of teenage mothers.

A correlation of .591 leaves 65.1% of the variance in enrolment unexplained.

Girls who left programs were difficult to reach and are probably under-represented.

Finally, the study covered a single district, which limits statistical generalization to other districts, although the findings should be transferable to settings with similar socio-demographic characteristics.

5. Conclusions

This study examined the effect of stakeholder engagement strategies on the enrolment of teenage mothers in back-to-school programs in Gasabo District, Kigali City.

Three main conclusions follow from the evidence gathered.

First, stakeholder engagement matters substantially for the enrolment of teenage mothers.

Engagement was strongly and significantly associated with enrolment (r = .591, R² = .349).

It remained a significant predictor when the other three implementation strategies were controlled, and it was the strongest of the four strategies in the joint model that explained 68.4% of the variance in programme success.

The null hypothesis was therefore rejected, validating the Stakeholder Theory premise that engaging all parties around the beneficiary, not the beneficiary alone, is central to project success.

Second, engagement is delivered unevenly.

It is strongest where it is institutionalized in schools and weakest at the community level, where community leader support received the lowest rating (M = 3.18) and coverage across the district’s 15 sectors was reported to be incomplete.

Programme staff communication with all parties was also only moderate (M = 3.31).

Qualitative evidence shows that the practices with the greatest effect, namely home visits and family sensitization before enrolment, depend on staff time and sustained outreach rather than on large financial outlays.

Third, the practical implications call for coordinated action.

Implementing organizations should adopt a standard family-engagement protocol in which every beneficiary’s family is visited and informed before enrolment and updated regularly thereafter.

The Gasabo District Administration and the Ministry of Education should extend Umudugudu-level sensitization to all 15 sectors and secure the explicit commitment of community leaders to school re-entry.

Schools should maintain the welcoming practices that were already rated most favorably.

Development partners should fund stakeholder engagement as a core component of back-to-school programs rather than as an optional extra.

Future research replicating this design across other districts, using longitudinal designs capable of testing the direction of causality, and using administrative enrolment records alongside perceptions, would further extend the findings reported here.

Abbreviations

FGD — Focus Group Discussion
M&E — Monitoring and Evaluation
MINEDUC — Ministry of Education
NGO — Non-Governmental Organization
NST2 — National Strategy for Transformation (2024–2029)
PMBOK — Project Management Body of Knowledge
RDHS — Rwanda Demographic and Health Survey
SD — Standard Deviation
SPSS — Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
UNFPA — United Nations Population Fund

Acknowledgments

The author thanks the teenage mothers, parents and guardians, teachers and school administrators, district officers and NGO staff in Gasabo District who participated in this study, and the Gasabo District Administration and the participating schools and organizations for facilitating access.

The author also thanks the University of Kigali School of Graduate Studies for institutional support during the conduct of this research, and her supervisor, Dr. Jean Baptiste Ndagijimana, for his guidance throughout the study.

Author Contributions

Umutoniwase Elyse: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review and editing.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

References

[1] UNFPA. Global Adolescent Pregnancy: Facts and Figures 2022. UNFPA; 2022.

[2] Ministry of Education (MINEDUC). Education Sector Strategic Plan 2018/19–2023/24. Kigali, Rwanda: Republic of Rwanda; 2018.

[3] Rwanda Government. National Strategy for Transformation (NST2) 2024–2029. Kigali, Rwanda: Republic of Rwanda; 2024.

[4] Rwanda Biomedical Centre, National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda. The 2025 Rwanda Demographic and Health Survey (2025 RDHS): Key Indicators Report. Kigali, Rwanda: NISR; 2025.

[5] Nsanzabera, C., et al. Community support and its role in adolescent pregnancy and school reintegration in rural Rwanda. African Journal of Reproductive Health. 2025;29(1):78–94.

[6] UNICEF Rwanda. Education in Rwanda: Annual Country Report 2024. Kigali, Rwanda: UNICEF Rwanda; 2024.

[7] Gatsinzi, P. Case study of the out-of-school teenage mothers’ lived experiences and perceptions on education in Rusororo Sector, Rwanda: A back-to-school framework. Educational Research and Reviews. 2022;17(3):120–130.

[8] Mwabu, G., et al. Addressing stigma and discrimination towards school re-entry of teenage mothers in Ghana. Journal of Adolescence. 2025;45(2):112–126.

[9] Freeman, R. E. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston, MA: Pitman Publishing; 1984.

[10] Project Management Institute. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide). 7th ed. Newtown Square, PA: PMI; 2021.

[11] Pinto, J. K., Slevin, D. P. Critical factors in successful project implementation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 1987;34(1):22–27.

[12] Ika, L. A., Diallo, A., Thuillier, D. Critical success factors for World Bank projects: An empirical investigation. International Journal of Project Management. 2012;30(1):105–116.

[13] Ika, L. A., Donnelly, J. Success conditions for international development capacity-building projects. International Journal of Project Management. 2017;35(1):44–63.

[14] Mugorewase, L., Kwena, R. The influence of resource planning practices on performance of donor funded education projects in Rwanda. Journal of Project Management Studies. 2024;6(2):45–67.

[15] Kothari, C. R. Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. 4th ed. New Delhi, India: New Age International Publishers; 2019.

[16] Krejci, R. V., Morgan, D. W. Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1970;30(3):607–610.

[17] Braun, V., Clarke, V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 2006;3(2):77–101. DOI: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

[18] Mezirow, J. Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 1991.

Biography

Umutoniwase Elyse is a Master of Science in Project Management candidate at the University of Kigali, Rwanda. Her research focuses on project implementation, stakeholder engagement and education development projects in Rwanda. Manuscript_Stakeholder_Engageme…

Research Field

Umutoniwase Elyse

Project Management
Stakeholder Engagement
Project Implementation
Education Development Projects
Teenage Mothers and School Re-entry