Introduction to Outcome Mapping by Bénédicte Fonteneau & Jan Van Ongevalle at DPH Day 2012

1. Introduction to Outcome
Mapping
ITG, 1/06/2012
Bénédicte Fonteneau & Jan Van Ongevalle
Design Charles & Ray Eames - Hang it all © Vitra

2. Brief definition of Outcome Mapping
•A highly adaptable
planning, monitoring and
evaluation methodology
•Focused on changes in
behaviour of social actors
with whom the
project/programme works
•Oriented towards social &
organisational learning

3. OM Paradigm Shift
Outcome mapping establishes a vision of the human, social, and
environmental betterment to which the program hopes to
contribute and then focuses monitoring and evaluation on
factors and actors within its 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 through changes in the behaviour of people;
therefore, this is the central concept of outcome mapping.
Sarah Earl (IDRC)
12-4-2013 3

4. OM Principles
Change is:
• Complex
– Involve a confluence of actors and factors
– relationships of cause and effect are unknown
• Continuous (not limited to the life of the intervention)
• Non-linear (unexpected results occur)
• Beyond the control of the development intervention (but subject
to its influence)
• Two-way ( you also change)
12-4-2013 4

5. Brief History
• Developed by the International Developement & Research
Centre (IDRC, Canada) in response to fundamental problems
with existing approaches to reporting on development impacts
– Proving cause/effect
– Attribution of impact
– Unexpected results
– Sustainability of impact
• 2000: Publication of manual in English
• 2006: OM Learning Community
12-4-2013 5

6. The steps of outcome mapping

7. The principles of Outcome Mapping
 The essence of social change is a process in which
diverse social actors do things differently than they had
been doing them before.
 Outcomes understood as changes in social actors.
 A development intervention influences outcomes in the
broad sense of the term: from inspiring and supporting
and facilitating to persuading and pressuring and even
forcing change.
ricardo.wilson-grau@inter.nl.net

8. Individual
Group
SOCIAL
ACTOR
Institution Ricardo.Wilson-Grau@inter.nl.net
Organisation

9. Outcomes
Behaviour
Relationships
CHANGE
Policies and practices Actions
Ricardo.Wilson-Grau@inter.nl.net

10. There is a limit to our influence
Strategic
partner
Project/ Partners final Beneficiaries
programme
Sphere of Sphere of Sphere of interest
control influence

12. There is a limit to our influence
Inputs, Outcomes: Changes
Impact:
activities, in behavior/prac- Changes in
outputs tices/relationships state
Sphere of Sphere of Sphere of interest
control influence

13. Outputs
• What the organisation generates directly
through its activities on the short-term – the
processes, goods and services that it
produces.
• For example: Workshops, training manuals,
research and assessment reports, guidelines
and action plans, strategies, and technical
assistance packages, amongst others.
• The organisation controls activities and
outputs.

14. Outcomes
Observable changes in social actors –
individuals, groups, organisations, institutions –
that potentially contribute to the long-term,
sustainable improvement in people’s lives or
the state of the environment envisioned in the
vision of the organisation.
The organisation influences outcomes.

15. Impact
Long-term, sustainable changes in the conditions
of people and the state of the environment that
structurally reduce poverty, improve human
well-being and protect and conserve natural
resources.
The organisation contributes indirectly to impact.

16. Improved
crop
production
Participating and nutrition
farmers learn how to Reduced
use drip irrigation numbers of
equipment Farmers share
Farmers new wells
new skills with
participate
peers
in field trials
Extension workers
Participatory visit demonstration Farmers adopting
research on farms drip irrigation
demonstration methods
farms Training of Greater quantities
to develop extension of groundwater
approaches workers available
to drip irrigation
Extension workers
Publication of promoting drip
performance of irrigation
different set-
ups

17. Focus of Outcome Mapping
Inputs Activities Outputs Outcomes Impacts
control
influence Interest
Outcome Mapping

18. Contributing to impact, rather than
attributing impact
CONTRIBUTION ATTRIBUTION

19. Contributing to impact?
IMPACT
INPUTS, ACTI
VITIES AND
OUTPUTS
ricardo.wilson-grau@inter.nl.net

20. The contribution of outcomes
ricardo.wilson-grau@inter.nl.net

21. You bridge the chasm between what you control
and the end result to which you aim to contribute
with outcomes that you have influenced
IMPACT
INPUTS, ACTI
VITIES AND
OUTPUTS
ricardo.wilson-grau@inter.nl.net

22. Boundary partners
Those individuals, groups, and Facilitation questions
organizations with whom the
project ✓ In which
individuals, groups, or
✓ interacts directly to effect organizations is your
program trying to encourage
change change as a contribution to
✓ anticipates opportunities the vision?
for influence
✓ With whom will you work
✓ engages in mutual directly?
learning
A program has normally not more
than 4 or 5 types ofboundary
partners

23. Progress Markers – Three levels of change
Love to see
(Deep transformation)
Like to see
(Active engagement)
Expect to see
(Early positive responses)

24. Writing progress markers
• If this BP were just beginning to move in the direction of
contributing to the vision as stated in the outcome challenge,
what could we expect to see in terms of changed behaviours?
(these are your expect to see progress markers)
• As the BP becomes more committed and knowledgeable and
better able to contribute to the vision, what behaviours would
we like to see emerge? (these are your like to see progress
markers)
• Once contributing maximally to the vision, what would you love
to see the boundary partner doing? (these are your love to see
progress markers)
12-4-2013 24

25. Progress markers
12-4-2013 25

26. X
12-4-2013 26

27. 12-4-2013 Thanks to Simon Hearn
27

28. The Monitoring Balancing Act

29. The steps of outcome mapping

30. Outcome Journal
Name of the boundary partner
Work dating from/to:
Name(s) of the person(s) who compiled the journal:
Outcome Challenge:.
Progress Markers Remarkable facts, what Follow up / corrective
happened measures
Unanticipated changes :
Which support strategies where helpful or require further follow-up or action during the next
term?
Contributing or limiting factors and actors towards achievement of progress markers: :
Summary of lessons learned/recommendations :

31. 12-4-2013 31

32. Advantages OM
1. OM opens the black box of the outcome level, which
is an important step towards sustained impact
2. OM helps to plan, follow-up and evaluate the
effects/impact of capacity development (CD). CD is
an essential component of development
cooperation
3. The OM design helps to bring in an actor-centered /
socialised intervention logic. This helps to trace
impact via the actors involved.
4. Helps (even forces) programme staff to develop a
sharper eye for the effects of what they do.

33. Potential limitations of OM
1. Limited focus at the level of the final beneficiaries /
might need complementary approaches
2. Requires rigorous and periodic monitoring and
formative evaluation (often a challenge for staff who
prefer ‘to do’ instead of reflecting on what they do)
3. Management support and participation of those who
do the influencing is crucial
4. Analysis and aggregation of qualitative data

34. Outcome Mapping Learning Community
12-4-2013 34