Outcome mapping is an M&E tool
developed by IDRC (The International Development Research Centre,
Canada - www.idrc.ca).
It focuses on the following key words:
- Behavioural change: Outcomes are defined as changes
in the behaviour, relationships, activities, or actions of the
people, groups, and organisations with whom a programme works
directly. These outcomes can be logically linked to a program's
activities, although they are not necessarily directly caused
by them.
- Boundary partners: Those individuals, groups, and organisations
with whom the programme interacts directly and with whom the programme
anticipates opportunities for influence. Most activities will
involve multiple outcomes because they have multiple boundary
partners.
- Contributions: By using Outcome Mapping, a programme
is not claiming the achievement of development impacts; rather,
the focus is on its contributions to outcomes. These outcomes,
in turn, enhance the possibility of development impacts - but
the relationship is not necessarily a direct one of cause and
effect.
As development is essentially about people relating to each other
and their environments, the focus of Outcome Mapping is on people.
The originality of the methodology is its shift away from assessing
the development impact of a programme (defined as changes in state
- for example, policy relevance, poverty alleviation, or reduced
conflict) and toward changes in the behaviours, relationships, actions
or activities of the people, groups, and organisations with whom
a development programme works directly. This shift significantly
alters the way a programme understands its goals and assesses its
performance and results. Outcome Mapping establishes a vision of
the human, social, and environmental betterment to which the programme
hopes to contribute and then focuses monitoring and evaluation on
factors and actors within that program's direct 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 by, and
for, people. Therefore, this is the central concept of Outcome Mapping.
Outcome Mapping does not belittle the importance of changes in state
(such as cleaner water or a stronger economy) but instead argues
that for each change in state there are correlating changes in behaviour.
An example
For example, a program's objective may be to provide communities
with access to cleaner water by installing purification filters.
Traditionally, the method of evaluating the results of this programme
would be to count the number of filters installed and measure changes
in the level of contaminants in the water before and after the filters
were installed. A focus on changes in behaviour begins instead from
the premise that water does not remain clean without people being
able to maintain its quality over time. The program's outcomes are
therefore evaluated in terms of whether those responsible for water
purity in the communities not only have, but use, the appropriate
tools, skills, and knowledge to monitor the contaminant levels,
change filters, or bring in experts when required. Outcome Mapping
provides a method for development programs to plan for and assess
the capacities that they are helping to build in the people, groups,
and organisations who will ultimately be responsible for improving
the well-being of their communities. Outcome Mapping does not attempt
to replace the more traditional forms of evaluation, which focus
on changes in conditions or in the state of well-being. Instead,
Outcome Mapping supplements other forms of evaluation by focusing
specifically on related behavioural change.
The three stages of Outcome Mapping
- The first stage, Intentional Design, helps a programme
establish consensus on the macro level changes it will help to
bring about and plan the strategies it will use. It helps answer
four questions: Why? (What is the vision to which the programme
wants to contribute?); Who? (Who are the program's boundary partners?);
What? (What are the changes that are being sought?); and How?
(How will the programme contribute to the change process?).
- The second stage, Outcome and Performance Monitoring,
provides a framework for the ongoing monitoring of the program's
actions and the boundary partners' progress toward the achievement
of outcomes. It is based largely on systematised self-assessment.
It provides the following data collection tools for elements identified
in the Intentional Design stage: an Outcome Journal' (progress
markers); a Strategy Journal' (strategy maps); and a 'Performance
Journal' (organisational practices).
- The third stage, Evaluation Planning, helps the programme
identify evaluation priorities and develop an evaluation plan.
The figure illustrates the three stages of Outcome Mapping.
The process for identifying the macro-level changes and designing
the monitoring framework and evaluation plan is intended to be participatory
and, wherever feasible, can involve the full range of stakeholders,
including boundary partners. Outcome Mapping is based on principles
of participation and purposefully includes those implementing the
programme in the design and data collection so as to encourage ownership
and use of findings. It is intended to be used as a consciousness-raising,
consensus-building, and empowerment tool for those working directly
in the development program.
Outcome Mapping introduces monitoring and evaluation considerations
at the planning stage of a program. Outcome Mapping moves away from
the notion that monitoring and evaluation are done to a program,
and, instead, actively engages the team in the design of a monitoring
framework and evaluation plan and promotes self-assessment.
Source
- Earl, Sarah, Fred Carden and Terry Smutylo (2001) Outcome Mapping;
Building Learning and Reflection into Development Programs, International
Development Research Centre (IDRC), see: www.idrc.ca/en/ev-9330-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html.
Further Resources
Back to Successful Communications tools
|
