Outcome Mapping

Presentation for Olof Palme International Center, Tirana, 1.11.2007

Steve Powell & Ivona ČelebičićproMENTE social research, Sarajevo

www.promente.org/om

Aims for this session

What is OM? What is new/right/exciting about OM? Our project: experiences from Bosnia and

Herzegovina Discussion What is in it for you

www.promente.org/om

Who are we

Steve Powell & Ivona ČelebičićproMENTE social research, Sarajevo

Sources for OM: INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH CENTRE www.idrc.ca

See: www.promente.org/OM

www.promente.org/om

What is OM?

An approach to project planning, monitoring and evaluation A new, soft alternative to replace or complement LFA, RBM etc A new paradigm/way of thinking. A backlash? An M&E tool for internal use by the implementing agency? A tool for external evaluators? A box full of ideas for everybody?

www.promente.org/om

Game

www.promente.org/om

Problems with traditional approachesTraditional OMForce implementing orgs to try to demonstrate that they caused numerically large impacts

Focus on development/change of key partners; quality, not quantity

Focus too much on impact in areas “where their influence … is low and decreasing relative to that of other actors”*

Quality, not quantity of change

Inflexible Flexible

CSOs tend to see it as alien Fits better with what CSOs feel they are doing: stimulating change, not delivering outputs

Attribution (did they really cause the change?) Contribution (what did they do, what worked?)

Mechanistic approach to strategy Strategy maps inspire thinking about different dimensions of planning

Provide only “clueless feedback” Rich, useful feedback

Exclusive focus on impact/results help implementing agencies to become “learning organisations”

www.promente.org/om

Vision

Logframe vs. OM

Goal

Objectives

Outcomes

Outputs Implementing agency: strategy

Boundary partners: changes in attitudes, behaviour, system

Other actors?

?

www.promente.org/om

Boundary partners ≠ beneficiaries! – (might be, do not have to be)

There can be more than one group of boundary partners Development work is really about leveraging the influence of a

limited number of key partners … … focus is NOT on the stakeholders with whom the boundary

partners interact changing consciousness, ways of working … … in service of a vision

Boundary partners: changes in attitudes, behaviour, system

www.promente.org/om

VisionThe partners become part of a new, younger, gender-equal generation in politics, who through their influence in their political parties initiate a change in the direction of everyday political issues – away from national/ethnic issues towards themes which respect democracy and human rights including gender rights and which will contribute to social prosperity in the long term. …. … …. …

Example

Implementing agency: Helsinki Citizen’s Assembly

Boundary partners: young politiciansOutcome challenge: Empowered young politicians

influence the change of the everyday politics in their parties. Recognized need for improvement in the areas selected in the party

modules, continuous activities on the empowerment of youth engaged in politics.

Other actors: political parties, other young politicians …

www.promente.org/om

Intentional design Outcome & performance monitoring

Evaluation

1. Vision

2. Mission

3. ...Boundary partners

4. ...Outcome challenges

5. ...Progress markers 9. Outcome journals

6. …Strategy maps 10. Strategy journal

7. Organisational practices 11. Performance journal

8. Monitoring priorities 12. Evaluation plan

OM: 12 steps

Helping the implementing partner to learn

Internal M &E

Considering all the dimensions of strategy

www.promente.org/om

VisionProgress marker ladders Outcome challenge 1

Love to see

Like to see

Expect to see

Outcome challenge 2

Boundary partner 1

Boundary partner 2

www.promente.org/om

“Official” OM and the spirit of OM

OM is available in bits ...

www.promente.org/om

Our project in B&H: 1 donor, 3 framework partners, 6 implementing partners, 6 projectsFramework organisation

Partner organisation Evaluated activity Timeframe

Kvinna til Kvinna Zenski Centar, Trebinje Womens political lobby 01st of January 2007 – 31st of December 2007

Most, Visegrad Village activities (including round tables in towns) 01st of January 2007 – 31st of December 2007

Olof Palme International Center

Helsinki Citizens Assembly (HCA) – Academy for political leaders) Banja Luka

Academy for political leaders 01st of January 2007 – 31st of December 2007

Civil Society Promotion Center – GROZD, "Citizen in action" Sarajevo

"Citizen in action"– Project of community-based advocacy campaigns for solving priority citizens problems from "Civic Platform for 2006 Elections". "Local Government leadership building activities"

01st of January 2007 – 31st of December 2007

Swedish Helsinki Committee for Human Rights

BiH Press Council (funded by SHC) Sarajevo

Operational costs for 2006 01st of January 2007 – 31st of December 2007

Vasa Prava Sarajevo "Improvement of access to justice – Raising public awareness on access to rights, legislative changes and legal procedures in BiH

01st of January 2007 – 31st of December 2007

www.promente.org/om

Aims of our OM project in B&H

Explorative evaluation of the six projects Sida-funded civil society programming: lessons

on sustainability Exploration of OM as a tool

www.promente.org/om

Conclusions & Recommendations

What do you think? What is OM NOT good for?

www.promente.org/om

“Official OM”

could/should be adopted by donors right from the project application stage– Otherwise, difficult to implement

Donors have to lower the measurement bar: from attribution to contribution

Donors have to want to help organisations to learn, at the cost of demonstrating effectiveness

Should be done internally -> Time constraints -> focus on limited, quality information

www.promente.org/om

Using the “spirit of OM” informally

can really change the way CSOs think about how they work

can usefully influence planning & implementation

www.promente.org/om

Take-home-point

In your planning and monitoring…– agree on a limited number of boundary partner groups – … and try to focus a “ladder” of changes in their

behaviour/ consciousness – … which you would like or love to see

www.promente.org/om

Practise!

Remember your vision… Identify 1-3 boundary partner groups Write an outcome challenge for ONE boundary

partner group Write progress markers for that outcome

challenge

www.promente.org/om

Identify 1-3 boundary partner groups

Those individuals, groups, & organizations with whom a program interacts directly to effect change & with whom the program can anticipate some opportunities for influence.

www.promente.org/om

Write an outcome challenge for ONE boundary partner group

Outcome Challenge Statements: Describe the boundary partner`s contributions to

the vision Describe the ideal behavioural changes Are about a single boundary partner