1. An Introduction to an Integrated P,M&E System developed by IDRC
Kaia Ambrose
October, 2005

2. Outline A little context: my perspective OM and IDRC Key aspects of OM
Stages of OM
A few lessons from the field

3. My perspective The Ceja Andina Project Ecopar
Ecuadorian NGO - research, training and capacity building for natural resource conservation
The Ceja Andina Project
Sustainable use of agriculture and forest biodiversity in the ceja andina (cloud forest) region of the northern Ecuadorian Andes.
Research-oriented (traditional and participatory), social learning processes, policy development and strengthening of local government.

4. Planning, Monitoring & Evaluation concerns in the Ceja Andina Project
How can we make
learning & action
on-going, iterative?
How can we (as an
organization) learn
from the project in
order to improve the
way we intervene?
How can we identify
our contributions to
development “along
the way” and not just downstream?
How can we bring
creativity and interest
to the PM&E process?
How can PM&E
be a participatory
process conducive
to social learning and
good decision making?

5. Origin of OM Focusing on & measuring downstream impact
Created by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) between 1998 and 2000 as a response to difficulties faced by their programs and projects
Endogenous decision-making processes through PM&E
“Measuring” the unmeasurables
Necesidad de:
enfatizar en aspectos que permitan la sostenibilidad del desarrollo (i.e.“capacidad para el desarrollo”)
capturar información útil, específica al ámbito de influencia de los programas

6. What is Outcome Mapping?
An integrated planning, monitoring & evaluation approach
An approach that defines outcomes as changes in the behaviour, relationships and actions of stakeholders / partners
An approach for designing in relation to the broader development context but assessing within your sphere of influence
A methodology that characterizes and asseses the program’s contributions to the achievement of outcomes

7. OM Key aspects Development occurs in open, complex and dynamic systems
Development changes are determined by multiple causes, factors and actors
Recognizes multiple logics, non-linear relationships, uncertainty, virtuous and vicious cycles in development processes
Considers relationships and influences among the partners
Attribution of results is not always possible
Importance of change as an ongoing process
The Program as an organizational unit is an “agent of change” and “subject to change”
Sistemas abiertos y complejos: en donde se reconocen multiples logicas relaciones no lineales, incertidumbre, circulos virtuosos y viciosos
Definir Causa y Efecto en un Sistema Abierto
We work in complex, open systems (many things happen at once, we aren`t the only people involved, relationships among events and actors creates a changing contex)
Linear logics models (if/then, so what?) aren`t adequate to capture this
Emphasis on attribution usually tries to credit a single actor whereas, in reality, multiple actors create results and need credit
Focus on positive intended results is insufficient as unexpected positive and negative results occur and should be accounted for and learned from
We were faced with the challenge of being honest & realistic in crediting the multiple actors & factors that contribute to development
Is this a problem you are grappling with? How?

8. Key differences Key differences with conventional PM&E approaches:
Linear, cause-effect, thinking contradicts the understanding of development as a complex process that occurs in open systems
So ... No claim attribution, just assessing contribution by those with whom programme works directly
Focus on changes in behaviours and relationships, not just actions

9. Assessing Development Results (in this case, Outcomes)
Behaviour Changes

10. Assessing Internal Performance
Behaviour Changes
Program

11. Assessing Influence
Behaviour Changes
Program

12. Program’s Sphere of Influence
The World Beyond
Program
= Program`s Boundary Partners

13. OM as a process
Encourages a “culture of reflection and evaluation” in all stakeholders’ involved
Enables social learning
Supports empowerment and self determination through participation and iterative learning
Facilitates more equitable dialogue processess
Facilitates organizational learning
Decision
making and
action

14. Intentional design: why, who, what and how

15. Characterizing and Assessing Outcomes
Program
BoundaryPartner
Strategy
Journal
Performance
Journal
Outcome
Journal
Organizational
Practices
Strategy
Map
Outcome Challenges
& Progress Markers

16. Vision Ceja Andina Project Ecopar Mission BP2 BP3 BP1 BP4
To enable the sustainable use and
restoration of biodiversity and
agrobiodiversity in the
natural and cultural landscape
of the ceja andina
Vision
Mission
BP2
Rural Schools
BP3
Municipalities
BP1
Farmer Groups
BP4
Local NGOs
Outcome
Challenge 1
and PMs
Outcome
Challenge 2
and PMs
Outcome
Challenge 3
and PMs
Outcome
Challenge 4
and PMs
Strategy Maps
Strategy Maps
Strategy Maps
Strategy Maps
Ceja Andina Project
Ecopar
(organizational Practices)

17. Aspects that can be improved
Situation and stakeholder analysis explicitly incorporating questions to enable us to articulate a social change theory
Identify a set of complementary tools that can be applied in each of the OM steps according to the users needs
Facilitation questions to define M&E priorities
Deepen the principles of Utilization Focused Evaluation
More attention to risk understanding and management (i.e. risks against powerful political/economic forces)