Outcome mapping dph day 2012


Published on

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Example...
  • - Sustained impact meaningthat the local service providers can continue to provide services even after the lifespan of the programme. Limitingyour focus on impact at the level of the finalbeneficiarymightresult in overlooking the necessarychange in the local service providers and other important actorsthatwillgaranteesustainedimproved service delivery. Italsohelps a programme to avoidthatit starts providing services themselves, deliveringverygoodresultsduring the programmebutwith the high risk of services falling back to previouslevelsfrombefore the programmewhen the programme has ended.
  • Outcome mapping dph day 2012

    1. 1. Introduction to Outcome Mapping ITG, 1/06/2012 Bénédicte Fonteneau & Jan Van OngevalleDesign Charles & Ray Eames - Hang it all © Vitra
    2. 2. Brief definition of Outcome Mapping •A highly adaptable planning, monitoring and evaluation methodology •Focused on changes in behaviour of social actors with whom the project/programme works •Oriented towards social & organisational learning
    3. 3. OM Paradigm ShiftOutcome mapping establishes a vision of the human, social, and environmental betterment to which the program hopes to contribute and then focuses monitoring and evaluation on factors and actors within its sphere of influence.The program’s contributions to development are planned and assessed based on its influence on the partners with whom it is working to effect change. At its essence, development is accomplished through changes in the behaviour of people; therefore, this is the central concept of outcome mapping. Sarah Earl (IDRC) 24-8-2012 3
    4. 4. OM PrinciplesChange is:• Complex – Involve a confluence of actors and factors – relationships of cause and effect are unknown• Continuous (not limited to the life of the intervention)• Non-linear (unexpected results occur)• Beyond the control of the development intervention (but subject to its influence)• Two-way ( you also change) 24-8-2012 4
    5. 5. Brief History• Developed by the International Developement & Research Centre (IDRC, Canada) in response to fundamental problems with existing approaches to reporting on development impacts – Proving cause/effect – Attribution of impact – Unexpected results – Sustainability of impact• 2000: Publication of manual in English• 2006: OM Learning Community 24-8-2012 5
    6. 6. The steps of outcome mapping
    7. 7. The principles of Outcome Mapping The essence of social change is a process in which diverse social actors do things differently than they had been doing them before. Outcomes understood as changes in social actors. A development intervention influences outcomes in the broad sense of the term: from inspiring and supporting and facilitating to persuading and pressuring and even forcing change. ricardo.wilson-grau@inter.nl.net
    8. 8. Individual Group SOCIAL ACTORInstitution Ricardo.Wilson-Grau@inter.nl.net Organisation
    9. 9. Outcomes Behaviour Relationships CHANGEPolicies and practices Actions Ricardo.Wilson-Grau@inter.nl.net
    10. 10. There is a limit to our influence Strategic partner Project/ Partners final Beneficiaries programmeSphere of Sphere of Sphere of interestcontrol influence
    11. 11. There is a limit to our influence Outcomes: Changes Impact: Inputs, activit in behavior/prac- Changes in ies, outputs tices/relationships stateSphere of Sphere of Sphere of interestcontrol influence
    12. 12. Outputs• What the organisation generates directly through its activities on the short-term – the processes, goods and services that it produces.• For example: Workshops, training manuals, research and assessment reports, guidelines and action plans, strategies, and technical assistance packages, amongst others.• The organisation controls activities and outputs.
    13. 13. OutcomesObservable changes in social actors – individuals, groups, organisations, institutions – that potentially contribute to the long- term, sustainable improvement in people’s lives or the state of the environment envisioned in the vision of the organisation.The organisation influences outcomes.
    14. 14. ImpactLong-term, sustainable changes in the conditions of people and the state of the environment that structurally reduce poverty, improve human well-being and protect and conserve natural resources.The organisation contributes indirectly to impact.
    15. 15. Improved crop production Participating and nutrition farmers learn how to Reduced use drip irrigation numbers of equipment Farmers share Farmers new wells new skills with participate peers in field trials Extension workersParticipatory visit demonstration Farmers adoptingresearch on farms drip irrigationdemonstration methodsfarms Training of Greater quantitiesto develop extension of groundwaterapproaches workers availableto drip irrigation Extension workers Publication of promoting drip performance of irrigation different set- ups
    16. 16. Focus of Outcome MappingInputs Activities Outputs Outcomes Impacts control influence Interest Outcome Mapping
    17. 17. Contributing to impact, rather thanattributing impact CONTRIBUTION ATTRIBUTION
    18. 18. Contributing to impact? IMPACTINPUTS, ACTI VITIES AND OUTPUTS ricardo.wilson-grau@inter.nl.net
    19. 19. The contribution of outcomes ricardo.wilson-grau@inter.nl.net
    20. 20. You bridge the chasm between what you control and the end result to which you aim to contribute with outcomes that you have influenced IMPACTINPUTS, ACTI VITIES AND OUTPUTS ricardo.wilson-grau@inter.nl.net
    21. 21. Boundary partnersThose individuals, groups, and Facilitation questionsorganizations with whom theproject ✓ In which individuals, groups, or✓ interacts directly to effect organizations is your program trying to encourage change change as a contribution to✓ anticipates opportunities the vision? for influence ✓ With whom will you work✓ engages in mutual directly? learning A program has normally not more than 4 or 5 types ofboundary partners
    22. 22. Progress Markers – Three levels of change Love to see (Deep transformation) Like to see (Active engagement) Expect to see (Early positive responses)
    23. 23. Writing progress markers• If this BP were just beginning to move in the direction of contributing to the vision as stated in the outcome challenge, what could we expect to see in terms of changed behaviours? (these are your expect to see progress markers)• As the BP becomes more committed and knowledgeable and better able to contribute to the vision, what behaviours would we like to see emerge? (these are your like to see progress markers)• Once contributing maximally to the vision, what would you love to see the boundary partner doing? (these are your love to see progress markers) 24-8-2012 24
    24. 24. Progress markers 24-8-2012 25
    25. 25. X 24-8-2012 26
    26. 26. 24-8-2012 Thanks to Simon Hearn 27
    27. 27. The Monitoring Balancing Act
    28. 28. The steps of outcome mapping
    29. 29. Outcome Journal Name of the boundary partnerWork dating from/to:Name(s) of the person(s) who compiled the journal:Outcome Challenge:.Progress Markers Remarkable facts, what Follow up / corrective happened measuresUnanticipated changes :Which support strategies where helpful or require further follow-up or action during the nextterm?Contributing or limiting factors and actors towards achievement of progress markers: :Summary of lessons learned/recommendations :
    30. 30. 24-8-2012 31
    31. 31. Advantages OM1. OM opens the black box of the outcome level, which is an important step towards sustained impact2. OM helps to plan, follow-up and evaluate the effects/impact of capacity development (CD). CD is an essential component of development cooperation3. The OM design helps to bring in an actor-centered / socialised intervention logic. This helps to trace impact via the actors involved.4. Helps (even forces) programme staff to develop a sharper eye for the effects of what they do.
    32. 32. Potential limitations of OM1. Limited focus at the level of the final beneficiaries / might need complementary approaches2. Requires rigorous and periodic monitoring and formative evaluation (often a challenge for staff who prefer ‘to do’ instead of reflecting on what they do)3. Management support and participation of those who do the influencing is crucial4. Analysis and aggregation of qualitative data
    33. 33. Outcome Mapping Learning Community 24-8-2012 34