Development Hypothesis or Theory of Change M&E Capacity Strengthening Workshop, Maputo 19 and 20 September 2011 Arif Rashid, TOPS.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Introduction to the Results Framework. What is a Results Framework? Graphic and narrative representation of a strategy for achieving a specific objective.
Advertisements

Data Quality Considerations
Content of an M&E Matrix
Indicator Performance Tracking Table
Overview M&E Capacity Strengthening Workshop, Maputo 19 and 20 September 2011.
Intervention logic and project results Jan Paul van Aken 25 September 2014.
Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance III Project (FANTA) FHI Connecticut Ave., NW Washington, DC Tel: Fax:
Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance III Project (FANTA) FHI Connecticut Ave., NW Washington, DC Tel: Fax:
Theory of Change, Impact Monitoring, and Most Significant Change EWB-UK Away Weekend – March 23, 2013.
Program Evaluation. Lecture Overview  Program evaluation and program development  Logic of program evaluation (Program theory)  Four-Step Model  Comprehensive.
Project development And Program Design following the Tamale, Addis Ababa and Dar workshops Dar es Salaam, Tanzania workshop Feb 2012 Jerry Glover.
Results-Based Management: Logical Framework Approach
Green Recovery And Reconstruction: Training Toolkit For Humanitarian Aid Project Design, Monitoring and Evaluation Session 2: Environmental Monitoring.
Action Logic Modelling Logic Models communicate a vision for an intervention as a solution to a public health nutrition (PHN) problem to:  funding agencies,
Monitoring and Evaluation Frameworks Kyiv, Ukraine May 23, 2006 MEASURE Evaluation.
Developing a Logic Model
Project Cycle Management (PCM)
Monitoring and Evaluation Frameworks   What is an M&E Framework?   Why do we use M&E Frameworks?   How do we develop M&E Frameworks? MEASURE Evaluation.
Logic Modeling for Success Dr Kathryn Wehrmann Illinois State University.
1 Minority SA/HIV Initiative MAI Training SPF Step 3 – Planning Presented By: Tracy Johnson, CSAP’s Central CAPT Janer Hernandez, CSAP’s Northeast CAPT.
Refining a Theory of Change 1 Barbara Reed & Dan Houston November 2014.
2014 AmeriCorps State and National Symposium How to Develop a Program Logic Model.
46th Annual MPESA Fall Conference
CASE STUDIES IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Lesson 5 – Logical Framework Approach (LFA)
Results-Based Management
Gender & Agriculture TOPS Capacity Strengthening Maputo, September 2011.
1 RBM Background Development aid is often provided on a point to point basis with no consistency with countries priorities. Development efforts are often.
TOPS Gender Task Force M&E Capacity Strengthening Workshop, Addis Ababa 4 to 8 June 2012 Kristi Tabaj, TOPS/Save the Children.
Understanding Indicators M&E Capacity Strengthening Workshop Addis Ababa 4 to 8 June 2012 Arif Rashid, TOPS.
Logic Models and Theory of Change Models: Defining and Telling Apart
Beyond logical frameworks to program impact pathways CIIFAD M&E Workshop 5 November 2011  135 Emerson Hall Sunny S. Kim, MPH PhD candidate Division of.
LIBERIA THE BIG PICTURE Can the Agency tell the truth about results? Can the participants tell the truth about results?
Julie R. Morales Butler Institute for Families University of Denver.
Theory of Change. TOC is an overarching theoretical framework on “how and why something works” A theory of change explains a process to reach a long-
Module 1 Session 1.3 Visual 1 Module 1 Understanding the Project and Project Management Session 1.3The Project Preparation/Analysis Process and the Hierarchy.
Project Management Learning Program July 2008, Mekong Institute, Khon Kaen, Thailand Project Design and Planning Sequence of Systematic Project Design.
Sources of Errors M&E Capacity Strengthening Workshop, Addis Ababa 4 to 8 June 2012 Arif Rashid, TOPS.
Developing a Framework In Support of a Community of Practice in ABI Jason Newberry, Research Director Tanya Darisi, Senior Researcher
M&E TRAINING MODULES Different tools for different applications.
Outcomes Thinking* Christine Jost Linking Knowledge with Action Research Theme KMC4CRP2 workshop, Addis Ababa, 4 December 2013 * Drawing from the presentation.
 2007 Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Section B Logic Models: The Pathway Model.
Outcomes Focused planning NHS Health Scotland
Outcomes Working Group: Webinar 2: Theory of Change Facilitators: Frances Sinha, Director EDA Rural Systems (India) and board member of SPTF. Anton Simanowitz,
Logic Model, Monitoring, Tracking and Evaluation Evaluation (Section T4-2)
Session 2: Developing a Comprehensive M&E Work Plan.
Introduction to Group Work. Learning Objectives The goal of the group project is to provide workshop participants with an opportunity to further develop.
Developing a Monitoring & Evaluation Plan MEASURE Evaluation.
Wisconsin Personnel Development System Grant Click on the speaker to listen to each slide. You may wish to follow along in your WPDM Guide.
Building an ENI CBC project
Monitoring and Evaluating Rural Advisory Services
Towards a GEWE Theory of Change
Monitoring and Evaluation Frameworks
Workshop to develop theories of change
Managing for Results Capacity in Higher Education Institutions
CIFSRF Phase 2 (Call 5) SIAC/PSC/Team meeting 13 May 2016, Hawassa
Feed the Future MEL webinar series
Monitoring and Evaluating Rural Advisory Services
Developing & Refining a Theory of Action
Logic Models and Theory of Change Models: Defining and Telling Apart
Project Name: Country:
منهج الإطار المنطقي وإطار الرصد والتقييم وإطار النتائج
THEORY OF CHANGE APPROACH
4.2 Identify intervention outputs
Introduction to M&E Frameworks
Community Led Agricultural Financing
Dimensions of Data Quality
OGB Partner Advocacy Workshop 18th & 19th March 2010
Integrating Gender M&E Capacity Strengthening Workshop, Addis Ababa
Climate Change Leadership
Presentation transcript:

Development Hypothesis or Theory of Change M&E Capacity Strengthening Workshop, Maputo 19 and 20 September 2011 Arif Rashid, TOPS

Development Hypothesis or Theory of Change ………….Is a systematic exploration of the links between activities, outcomes, goal and the context. Slide # 1

DH or TC is a “Process and a “Product” A structured thinking PROCESS that allows groups to turn their theories about what needs to change and why into a “causal pathway”. A PRODUCT that illustrates the results of the change process. Slide # 2

What is a “Causal Pathway”? A step-by-step backwards mapping process through which a group determines ALL the preconditions necessary to reach an ultimate goal. In USAID terminology this is called Development Hypothesis (ADS 201) Low Per Capita Income Low HH Income High dependency ratio HH members have low level of skills Limited employment opportunities Limited access to financial resources Large family size Single income earner in the HH Slide # 3

Elements of a Theory of Change/ Development Hypothesis A pathway of change that shows the connections between longterm, intermediate and early outcomes Statements that explain how the intervention fits along the pathway of change Justifications that explain why the initiative expects change to occur Slide # 4

Why We Need One? Participatory process Creates realistic program expectations Create a safe place to be reflective Can improve monitoring and evaluation Improves understanding about the program logic Slide # 5

Uses Decision making: Whether to carry out an activity Align of program activities with goals Monitor the results chain Evaluation Slide # 6

Other Advantages Gaps between steps and outcomes become evident Can refine project strategies to achieve the goal Can revise the assumptions Evaluations based on a theory carry more weight Improves transparency Slide # 7

The Pathway of Change Underlying conditions Intervention Output Outcome Higher level outcome Long term goal Influenced by our thinking Learn from our actions Refine our thinking Pathway of change Slide # 8

Development Hypothesis “Steps” Determine the Goal Develop the Outcomes map Identify which of the outcomes your project will address Identify activities that will help achieve the outcomes Slide # 9

Causal Pathway to Results Framework Slide # 10

Approximate correlation between RF and indicator levels Strategic Objective 1 Strategic Objective 2 Overarching Goal Intermediate Result 1.1 Intermediate Result 1.2 Activities: a) b) c) Activities: a) b) c) Activities: a) b) c) Intermediate Result 2.1 Outputs Processes Inputs Low – medium level Outcome Indicators Impact Indicators Higher level Outcome Indicators Adapted from FANTA 2 presentation Slide # 11

Basic Purposes of Results Framework Strategic Objective 1 Strategic Objective 2 Overarching Goal Intermediate Result 1.1 Intermediate Result 1.2 Activities: a) b) c) Activities: a) b) c) Activities: a) b) c) Intermediate Result 2.1 Outputs Processes Inputs Low – medium level Outcome Indicators Impact Indicators Higher level Outcome Indicators Adapted from FANTA 2 presentation Slide # 11 PROJECT DESIGN/ PLANNING MONITORING & EVALUATION COMMUNICATION

How will you know if you have succeeded Identify indicators for each outcome you want to address. Example: Outcome: Improved HH food production practices adopted and utilized – Change in yield (+) – Change in farm size (+) – Change in cropping intensity (+) Slide # 12

What must be determined for each indicator? Who will be impacted? How many will be impacted? How much will it change? When will it change by? Slide # 13

How will you measure the indicator Determine: – What measurement tool to use? – When to measure? – Who will do the measurement? Slide # 14

Design Interventions Determine the interventions (actions, strategies) to be used to achieve identified outcomes. What will be done, by who, how, and when? Test your assumptions (Will these actions really work? Do your organization have the capacity to implement them? ) Slide # 15

 Production of non- traditional crops increased Activities (Inputs) IR SO  Farm incomes increased  We train farmers from 50 households to use new seeds, and  We distribute seeds and fertilizer Goal  Poverty reduced  1 bag of seed and 5 bags of fertilizer distributed to 50 households;  50 households trained in cultivation of new crop.  Only 5 of 50 households produced the new crop.  Household incomes remained unchanged Monitoring at every level helps pinpoint where a barrier may exist Families had to eat the seeds during the hungry months Adapted from FANTA 2 presentation Slide # 16

This presentation was made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents are the responsibility of Save the Children and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.