From Program Evaluator to PhD to Career Coach: Why I Do Both

People always ask me: “Why do you do both career coaching and program evaluation? Aren’t those totally different?”

They are more connected than you’d think. Let me tell you how I got here.

After receiving my master’s degree in psychology, I spent two years as an adjunct teaching developmental psychology. But it was my next role that changed everything.

I became Research & Data Manager at Casita Maria Center for Arts & Education, an after-school arts program in the South Bronx serving underrepresented youth and families. I fell in love with program evaluation. It was very satisfying seeing how the data we collected and analyzed was used to make actionable insights, data-driven decision towards program improvements.

But the role wasn't sustainable, three days a week I drove 90 minutes each way (once it took three hours to get home). I loved the work, but I needed a change.

I had already applied to a Cognitive Psychology PhD program, thinking a doctorate would open doors. I had no idea how right I was, it was just not in the way I expected.

A year later, I started my PhD program. From day one, I knew I didn't want to stay in academia. My adjunct experience had shown me that professorhood wasn't my path. Graduate school only solidified that.

If you've been through the grueling five-plus years of a PhD, you know: graduate school trains you for ONE thing, academia. I wasn't being trained for industry. I had to figure that out myself.

By my third year, anxiety hit hard. I'd been in school so long that academia felt safe, and industry felt impossible. How would my niche research interest translate? What if I didn't find a job after all this? How do I "sell" myself? Will anyone hire me at my age? (The show Younger was popular then, and I related hard.)

There were many sleepless nights.

Then came the turning point: a summer internship.

Spring of my third year, a postdoc emailed me a job posting. My first thought? I'm too old for internships. My kids were in middle and high school. The commute was an hour. But my resume was thin on industry experience, and I was running out of time.

I applied that morning. Got a call that afternoon. Interviewed a week later. Offered the position that same day.

Later I learned they'd had an intern drop out last-minute and were scrambling. Cue imposter syndrome: They don't really want me. I'm just filling a gap.

But I showed up. I learned. And critically, I learned how to translate my expertise.

My PhD research was on expertise, how people learn, remember, make decisions, and engage with material. In industry? That meant I understood training effectiveness. Suddenly my niche academic work had direct application.

The job search was brutal. Dozens of applications. One interview. But I'd learned to network, translate my skills, and prepare strategically. By summer's end, I had a full-time offer, at the same organization where I'd interned.

Networking worked. Strategic preparation worked. Evidence-based job search strategies worked.

As I navigated this transition, I realized I'd developed a system. That system became the RECLAIM Framework.

Now, into my industry career, I've come full circle.

I'm back to program evaluation, but this time with cognitive psychology training and the lived experience of navigating both worlds. I know what makes evaluation useful versus useless because I've been the practitioner desperate for actionable insights. I've sat through presentations of findings that meant nothing to me. I've seen million-dollar programs continue unchanged despite "failed" evaluations because the reports were incomprehensible. From my years in evaluation and cognitive psychology, I built the IMPACT Framework™ for program evaluation that actually drives change.

I'm solving the problem I experienced: the PhD-to-industry transition that nobody prepares you for. The sleepless nights wondering if your expertise matters outside academia. The confusion about how to network when you have no industry contacts. The interviews where you stumble trying to explain your research in language employers understand.

These aren't separate missions. Both serve people navigating systems not designed for them:

• Women PhDs transitioning to industry without roadmaps

• Mission-driven organizations measuring impact without resources or training

  
  

Both require translating invisible value into language outsiders understand. Both fail when you skip discovery and jump to action. Both succeed through evidence-based iteration, not one-time fixes.

That's why I do both.

I've been the woman PhD panicking about her future. I've been the evaluator wondering if anyone reads my reports. I've been the first-gen student, the working mom, the person figuring everything out the hard way.

Now I help others skip the struggle.

Whether you're navigating a career transition or measuring what matters in your programs, you deserve evidence-based support. Not guesswork. Not just compliance. Strategies grounded in research and built for your reality.