The document summarizes key points from a workshop on developing impact pathways for projects. 1. The workshop discussed making impact pathways (how projects create change) explicit in order to improve project practice and impact. Explicit impact pathways can help with planning, evaluation, program integration, and ex-post impact assessment. 2. The workshop introduced the Pathways of Influence, Performance and Adoption (PIPA) approach for making impact pathways explicit. PIPA develops two perspectives - a problem tree showing how project outputs address problems to achieve goals, and network maps showing the relationships needed over time to achieve goals. 3. Integrating these perspectives provides a more complete picture of a project's theory of change from an

1. BFP-2 Impact Pathways
Workshop
4 – 5 February, 2008
CIAT
Boru Douthwaite and Sophie Alvarez, CPWF
Impact Project
CIAT, Cali, Colombia

2. Impact Pathways Matter

3. Why make Impact Pathways
explicit?
• People plan and implement projects (programs, countries
…) on the basis of their change models - their implicit
theories about how the world works, i.e., impact pathways
• If you can improve the impact pathways (IPs) you can
improve the practice, making impact more likely
• IPs show a project’s rationale and networks
– Help communicate what the project is doing
• More fundable
– Help with planning, including MTPs
– Provide a basis for evaluation
• Starting point for evaluation is a good model of what you think will
happen
• Provide information to support programmatic integration
• Provides impact hypotheses for ex-post impact assessment

4. PIPA makes Impact Pathways
explicit
It does so by developing two
perspectives ….
1. A problem tree that shows a linear logic
linking project outputs to project goal; and
2. Network maps that show the evolving
relationships necessary to achieve the goal

5. Impact pathways – a more complete
picture….
>--------------Outcome-chain perspective------------------>
Problem Tree
<-----the full picture---->
Network maps
>---------------Actor-orientated perspective---------

6. Foundations
• Adaptation of concepts from Program Evaluation
– Renger and Titcomb (2002) – problem trees
– Chen (2005) – program theory
– Mayne (2004) - performance stories
• Innovation histories
– Douthwaite and Ashby, 2005
• Social network analysis
– Cross and Parker, 2004

7. p ro je c t o u tp u ts to p ro je c t g o a l
I d e n t if y in g a lin e a r lo g ic lin k in g
1 . P ro b le m T re e
H e lp s u n d e rs ta n d p ro je c t ra tio n a le
a n d w h a t n e e d s to c h a n g e
P r o d u c ts p r o d u c e d in th e W o r k s h o p
2 . O u tp u ts
W h a t th e p ro je c t w ill p ro d u c e
3 . V is io n
Workshop n e tw o rk o f a cto rs n e e d e d
I d e n t if y in g t h e e v o lv in g
W h e re p ro je c t is g o in g - G o a l
t o a c h ie v e t h e v is io n
Road Map
4 . "N o w "
n e tw o rk m a p 5 . "F u tu re "
N e c e s s a ry 6 . P ro je ct n e tw o rk m a p
re la tio n s h ip s S c a lin g N e c e s s a ry
in p la c e S tra te g y re la tio n s h ip s
to p ro d u c e to a c h ie v e
th e O U T P U T S th e V IS IO N
I n t e g r a t io n o f
7 . O u tc o m e s lo g ic m o d e l
b o t h v ie w s
T h e o u tc o m e s th e p ro je c t w ill h e lp a c h ie v e , h o w , a n d w ith w h o m

8. After the Workshop
• Complete outcomes logic model (that
contains outcome hypotheses)
• Identify outcome targets and milestones
measuring progress towards them
• Project M&E based on these
• Regular reflection and updating of outcome
hypotheses (i.e., impact pathways)

9. Expectations

10. W h y is t h is p r o b le m h a p p e n in g ?
W hy?
2nd LEVEL
1st LEVEL
e
er
t H
ar
St
R e l a t io n s h ip
N o in f o r m a t io n
a v a ila b le a b o u t w a te r- fo o d - P ro b le m
W a te r P o v e rty (W P 1 )
"W a te r P o v e rty " p o v e rty n o t
in b a s in s c le a r
L a c k o f c l a r it y
W h o h a s th e a b o u t th e
W a t e r A v a ila b ilit y ( W P 2 ) w a te r? h o w th e u se
o f w a t e r in
a g r ic u lt u r e D ire c tio n
W hat does
w a t e r d o in
s u p p o rts and
b a s in s ? li v e lih o o d s p u rp o s e o f
th e C P W F
La ck o f d a ta o n u n c le a r
W a te r "W h y h a v e
W a t e r P ro d u c t iv it y ( W P 3 )
P r o d u c t iv it y b e n ch m a rk
b a s in s ? "
N o t c le a r w h a t
a re th e
I n s t it u t io n a n d o p p o r t u n it ie s " M o v in g
in t e rv e n t io n a n a ly s is ( W P 4 & 5 )
a n d r is k s f o r fo rw a rd o n
c h a n g e s in to o m a n y
a g r ic u lt u r a l fro n ts "
w a te r u se
( G e n e ric ) P ro b le m tre e fo r th e B F P 2 s

11. Exercise Deriving Products/
1 Outputs from the Problem
Tree
• List the outputs, the use of which will address
the determinants
– The determinants are the problems the project is
directly addressing with its outputs

12. Some definitions
 Activity – what we’re doing inside the project
 Hold IP Workshop
 Outputs – what we produce that other people make use of, that solve the
determinant
 Improved rice variety; priority setting publication
 Determinant – determinants are the problems the project is directly addressing
with its outputs
 Next users – people and organizations who directly use the outputs
 End users – the people and organizations that the next users work with. Often the
end users are the ultimate beneficiaries (e.g., resource-poor farmers), but not
always.
 Politically-important actors– people and organizations whose support is needed
for project success
 Outcomes – usually the results of the use of outputs by others (often come in
chains)
 Promotion of rice variety by extension system
 Adoption of rice variety by farmers
 Higher rice yields
 Higher income
 More children sent to school

13. Level of influence of Project
Level of influence of a project
High
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
Low
Research Output 3
Output Outcome Impact
activity target
Produce research products SEE Impacts
Activities
Use of research products (outcomes)
10 - 30 years

14. Scaling Out and Scaling Up
• Scaling up - an
institutional expansion,
from adopters and their
grassroots organizations
to policy makers, donors,
development institutions
• Scaling out - spread of a
project outputs (i.e., a
new technology, a new
strategy, etc.) from farmer
to farmer, community to
community, within the
same stakeholder groups

15. Exercise
Develop a vision of project
2 success at the end of the project
• Take 5 minutes to individually answer the question, then
develop common project vision by filling out Worksheet 1
– You wake up after your project has finished. Your project has
Keep it realistic
been a success and is well on its way to achieving its goal.
Describe what this success looks like to a journalist:
• What was the situation like before the project started (hint – look at the
problem tree)
– What were the unmet needs and requirements of next users and end users?
• What are the next users (disaggregate) now doing differently?
• How are project outputs disseminating (scaling out)?
• What political support is nurturing this spread (scaling up)?
• What are the end users doing differently?
• What are the benefits they are enjoying as a result of the project?

16. p ro je c t o u tp u ts to p ro je c t g o a l
I d e n t if y in g a lin e a r lo g ic lin k in g
1 . P ro b le m T re e
H e lp s u n d e rs ta n d p ro je c t ra tio n a le
a n d w h a t n e e d s to c h a n g e
P r o d u c ts p r o d u c e d in th e W o r k s h o p
2 . O u tp u ts
W h a t th e p ro je c t w ill p ro d u c e
3 . V is io n
Workshop n e tw o rk o f a cto rs n e e d e d
I d e n t if y in g t h e e v o lv in g
W h e re p ro je c t is g o in g - G o a l
t o a c h ie v e t h e v is io n
Road Map
4 . "N o w "
n e tw o rk m a p 5 . "F u tu re "
N e c e s s a ry 6 . P ro je ct n e tw o rk m a p
re la tio n s h ip s S c a lin g N e c e s s a ry
in p la c e S tra te g y re la tio n s h ip s
to p ro d u c e to a c h ie v e
th e O U T P U T S th e V IS IO N
I n t e g r a t io n o f
7 . O u tc o m e s lo g ic m o d e l
b o t h v ie w s
T h e o u tc o m e s th e p ro je c t w ill h e lp a c h ie v e , h o w , a n d w ith w h o m

18. Airline network

20. What is a network?
A network is a collection of
people and / or things that
are connected to each other
by some kind of relationship
 Many kinds of entities can be part of a network: people,
projects, organisations, documents, events, cities, countries,
etc.
 Each of these entities can have different levels of influence in
the network, and
 And there are many kinds of relationships that can link such
entities, involving transmission or exchange of information,
money, goods, affection, influence, infection, etc.

21. Advantages of network models
 Actor-oriented descriptions:
 observable, understandable, verifiable
 Captures real-life complexity:
 We are subject to multiple influences
 We influence many others
 Network models help us understand innovation
processes:
 Innovation processes happen through different actors,
acting in networks
 These interactions, relationships and influence are modeled
in network maps

22. A
network
diagram
(organisations
linked by a
project)
Influence pathway: actor + relationship + actor + relationship…

23. WRI
A plotted FRANC
network
diagram, ENTERPRISE
CREPA
multiple URBANET MAs
ISSER
relations
UDS
KNUST
SGs
CPWF
WRC
FGs RVAU
UC
IWMI
MOFA
The human eye is an analytic tool of remarkable power, and eyeballing pictures of
networks is an excellent way to gain an understanding of their structure.
(The structure and function of complex networks, M. E. J. Newman)

24. Network tasks…..
1. Identify relevant actors
2. Develop network diagrams of key relationships
(research, funding, scaling out and scaling up)
for
 Your project now
 Residual network 2 years after project has finished
3. Identify key levels of influence
4. Develop a scaling influence strategy (Worksheet 2)

25. Identify key actors
• Who are the actors involved in research, funding,
scaling out and scaling up in the area your
project is working in?
 Can be positions (eg. DDG-R) or organizations
 Remember actors at different scales: community/local, your
own organization, regional, national, international

26. Some types of actors
Government Organization
National Agricultural Research and Extension
Organization (NAREO)
CGIAR Centre
University
Ultimate Beneficiary
NGO
Research Organization
Private Sector
Donor
Other (please specify)

27. Exercise
Fill out an actor table
3
ACRONYM FULL NAME LOCATION TYPE OF ROLE
ORGANIZATION
IRRI Int. Rice Research Los Baños, CG Centre Project
Institute Philippines implementer
MOFA Ministry of Accra, GO Politically-
Fisheries and Agric. Ghana important
actor
FGs Farmers Groups Northern Ult. beneficiary End user
Ghana
PhilRice Philippine Rice Muños, NAREO Next user
Research Institute Philippines
DfID Dept. for Int. London, Govnt. Org Funding
Development England agency
DDG-R Deputy Director CIAT, Cali CG Centre Politically-
General of Research important

28. Exercise
Develop a network diagram for
4a your project now
 Actors:
 Use cards for nodes
 Relationships
 Use arrows to describe direction
 Use colour to describe relationship type
 Green = funding; brown = research / work; red = scaling
out; black = scaling up
 Don’t use distance/length

30. Exercise Identify influence levels
4b and attitudes in the
networks
Actors:
 Construct influence towers (0-3 chips) for key actors
 Indicate their attitude towards your project:
positive 
neutral 
negative 

32. Exercise
Develop a future network
5 corresponding to the vision
 Draw a second network showing how actors need to be linked to achieve the vision
 Adjust the influence and attitude
 Will the attitude of the actor remain the same or change?
 Will the same actors still be equally influential?
 Will there be new influential actors in the area?

33. Exercis Developing a Scaling Strategy
e (Table 2)
6
Describe the most Why is the change What are the
important important to project’s strategies
differences between achieve the vision? for achieving the
the two networks change?

34. p ro je c t o u tp u ts to p ro je c t g o a l
I d e n t if y in g a lin e a r lo g ic lin k in g
1 . P ro b le m T re e
H e lp s u n d e rs ta n d p ro je c t ra tio n a le
a n d w h a t n e e d s to c h a n g e
P r o d u c ts p r o d u c e d in th e W o r k s h o p
2 . O u tp u ts
W h a t th e p ro je c t w ill p ro d u c e
3 . V is io n
Workshop n e tw o rk o f a cto rs n e e d e d
I d e n t if y in g t h e e v o lv in g
W h e re p ro je c t is g o in g - G o a l
t o a c h ie v e t h e v is io n
Road Map
4 . "N o w "
n e tw o rk m a p 5 . "F u tu re "
N e c e s s a ry 6 . P ro je ct n e tw o rk m a p
re la tio n s h ip s S c a lin g N e c e s s a ry
in p la c e S tra te g y re la tio n s h ip s
to p ro d u c e to a c h ie v e
th e O U T P U T S th e V IS IO N
I n t e g r a t io n o f
7 . O u tc o m e s lo g ic m o d e l
b o t h v ie w s
T h e o u tc o m e s th e p ro je c t w ill h e lp a c h ie v e , h o w , a n d w ith w h o m

35. Developing the Outcomes Logic
Model (a description of the project’s impact
pathways)
• Why (Dart, 2005)?
– To evaluate or clarify the logic of the project
intervention
– To provide a framework to evaluate the
performance of a project
• Before, during and after
• Evaluation can provide information to improve
decision making and enhance learning

36. Exercis
e
Outcomes Logic Model
7
(fill one table for all stakeholder groups)
Actor (or group Change in Change in KAS Project
of actors who Practice of of Actor strategies to
are expected to Actor required to bring about
change in the support this these changes
same way) change in KAS and
Practice in
Actor
KAS = Knowledge, Attitudes and Skills

37. Where we are now
F u tu re w ith o u t
1 in te rve n tio n
Tim e
5
4
3 V is io n
Im p a c t
2
P a th w a y s
1
Im p a c t P a th w a y s
W orkshop Im p r o v e m e n t

38. Impact Pathways Evaluation
2 F u tu re w ith o u t
in te rve n tio n
Tim e
5
A d ju s te d
4 A d ju s te d V is io n
Im p a c t P a th w a y s
3
2
1
R e fle ctio n
Im p r o v e m e n t

39. The process
3 F u tu re w ith o u t A c tu al
im p ro ve m e n ts
V is io n s
in te rve n tio n
T im e
5
4
3
Im p a c t p a th w a y s
2
1 R e fle ctio n
W o rksh o ps
Im p r o v e m e n t

40. Resources
• http://impactpathways.pbwiki.com
• Douthwaite, Alvarez, Thiele, Mackay. 2008.
Participatory Impact Pathways Analysis: A
Practical Method for Project Planning and
Evaluation. ILAC Brief (in press)
• b.s.alvarez@cgiar.org