A Complimentary Approach to Developing Progress Markers in

Outcome Mapping

Julius Nyangaga and Heidi Schaeffer

1. To share results of the Progress Marker Research.

2. To discuss how the results can be used to think about change in Boundary Partners and to develop Progress Markers.

Objectives of the webinar

Introduction: boundary partners and outcome challenges

Boundary Partners are Individuals, Groups or Organizations that you do not control but in whom you wish to support transformation.

The Outcome Challenge is the ideal transformation (in the form of behavior, actions, interactions, relationships, cultures, policies and practices) sought in the boundary partner.

Progress Markers are graduated indicators of transformation towards the outcome challenge

✓They are the OM indicators of change.

✓Starting from what is expected to be immediate reactions to the project/intervention …

✓They demonstrate progression in transformation … over time or greater commitment to desired change

5

Expect to see PMs

Love to see PMs

Like to see PMs

Progress Markers = change ladder

Key rule for progress markers …

PMs are changes associated WITH a Boundary Partner:

For a Farmer Field Schools (FFS) project, the PMs for extension agents as boundary partners included:

-The extension agents are working directly with the farming communities to establish the FFS-They (the extension agents) run FFS sessions with a high level of participation by both men and women farmers-They form networks of FFS facilitators for knowledge and information exchange, peer-support

PMs here are about transformation in the extension agents, .. and not the farmers or other actors

Examples of Bad Progress Markers

They must be about observable changes in the actions, interactions, relationships, procedures or policies of a boundary partner. e.g. The effects of climate change on poverty are reduced.

They must be measurable. e.g. Awareness about the effects of climate change is increased.

Progress Markers in the OM manual

The Outcome Mapping manual proposes a way to categorize changes in boundary partners (the Progress markers) as a progression in phased steps from ‘expect to see →like to see →love to see’.

Hypothesis: Behavioural change in BPs follows an observable patterns that can make them easier to develop

Progress Marker Research – method

32 sets of Progress Markers (indicators in OM) from 13 Projects (using Outcome Mapping for PPM&E) were analyzed in 2009/2010 to determine if there were comparable patterns in the stages of change in Boundary Partners

Analysis entailed reviewing the project, the BP and targeted Outcome Challenge and placing the progress marker into categories of practice

Some of the projects and their boundary partners: …

Project Boundary Partner

Quality Education and Vulnerability Programme (2008-2013). Funded by VVOB

Co-curricular support structures

VECO Indonesia’s country programme on sustainable agriculture chain development

Local Service NGO’s

Lake Winnipeg (Canada) Watershed Initiative Community and private foundations

The YCDO Coalition; Realizing the potential of young people as leaders in using information and communications technologies (ICTs)

Young Social Entrepreneurs

ILRI’s Commercialisation of the Infection and Treatment Method of Immunisation against East Coast fever in cattle

Private Commercial Partners, Companies

ILRI’s Farmer Field Schools project Extension Agents/Workers

Progress Marker Research – method

Boundary partner sets – an exampleProject:Project: ILRI implementing Farmer Field Schools for livestock keepers

Boundary Partners:

Roles:

FFS Implementers

Implementers (donor-organizations and development agents) who provided funds and were expected to apply the methodology in their development work.

Extension Agents/Workers

The extension are agents appreciating the principles to an extent that they (own their own) use LFFS as the primary method of information sharing and learning methodology with their clients

Donor Organizations

include donor-organizations and development agents who, not only provided funds for the initial stages of activities, but also – in the long run – were expected to apply the methodology in their respective development activities.

Planners Policy-makers and planning and regulatory authorities associated with the livestock sector, and particularly education and extension processes

P1 transformation: Progress Markers Showing practices around knowledge acquisition about project’s intentions, and building required capacity

The BP is ...

“... ‘interacting with’ the project team to learn about the technology”

“...raising questions and issues that (the Project) will address (the

BP’s) uptake of the technology”

“...seeking information on issues related to the technology”

“...clarifying their purpose, methods of organisation and internal

functioning in line with project vision, mission”

Progress Marker Research – findings

P1

Preparation for the Journey

Gathering knowledge and growing understanding of themselves; the beneficiaries and the environment

Organizing regular planning meetings

Seeking out additional information from external sources

Attending events Honoring their roles and carrying out tasks

Requesting information and training

Familiarizing themselves

Developing organizational capacity

Actively communicating and sharing information

P2 transformation: Progress Markers showing greater involvement (in the project mission and activities) and promotion of targeted vision to others

The BP is ...

“...establishing and expanding their membership base ...”

“...initiating activities/meetings during which members and other

stakeholders can share, learn and cooperate to undertake project

activities”

“...identifying & collaborating with key actors of the supported value

chain”

Progress Marker Research – findings

P2The Owned Journey Begins

commitment to learning and building networks of support

Initiating partnerships collaborating and actively sharing experiences and current information

Organizing and learning activities

building teams and networks, joining with others

Monitoring and evaluating their actions

Commitment of time and financial resources

Accurately entering data Interacting frequently with staff to provide consistency in the formulation of policies

P3 transformation: Progress Markers showing ownership of transformation through own investment, policy influence and institutionalization

The BP is ...

“...modifying/creating their (policies) and institutional structures to

mainstream the change”

“... generating their own funds and re-investing in (related)

community projects”

“... establishing mechanisms to share and review work programmes

across departments”

Progress Marker Research – findings

P3The Owned Journey Continues

Continuous actions (leadership) to support change; policy change

Undertaking asset investments

Developing multi-stakeholder networks

Engaging in policy dialogue Participating in regional, national / International forums as spokespersons

Advocating for institutionalization of new approach

Influencing policy at local and national levels

Successfully obtaining funding

Facilitating continuous monitoring

Progress Markers, BPs and Context influence

A BP’s set of markers developed for and with a partner will strongly be related to the project’s context

... will depend on the stage of project

implementation and the alignment status of the BP

to the project goals and the shared vision of change

What phases of change tell us about BPs

P1 transformation: Progress Markers Showing knowledge acquisition about project intention, and building required capacity

... crucial when introducing a project to new boundary partners

... vital in getting support from those disinclined to the mission or

vision

Aim: to increase their knowledge regarding the Program’s

background and justification so as to develop acceptance

P2 transformation: Progress Markers showing greater involvement (in the project mission and activities) and promotion of targeted vision to others

... working with BPs who are relatively more aligned and ready to

support the project’s mission

BP helps translate project intentions into what they would

like/prefer and promoting the project’s vision and mission to other

stakeholders)

What phases of change tell us about BPs

P3 transformation: Progress Markers showing ownership of transformation through own investment, policy influence and institutionalization

... working with BPs demonstrating support, the program would be

to entrench targeted changes

Use P3 types of PMs (‘culturalization', institutionalization and

regularization of the change through long term policies) to develop

ownership and sustainability

What phases of change tell us about BPs

P1, P2, P3 Circle of Change

Comparing with “Expect to, Like to, Love to”

The whole set

is developed

Expect to see

Like to see

Love to see

P1: Building interest, capacity

P2: Involved, promoting

P3: Owning & sustaining

Set will depend

on BP alignment

and project

stage

Both approaches can complement each other

Progress Markers are NOT linear

Revised P1

Revised P2

Revised P3

P1

P2P3

Example: BP Outcome Challenge-BP establishing participation throughout the organization in Change Management

- ... maintaining close working relationships with Head of Governments and other officials.

-... demonstrates strong leadership, frequent face-to-face communication with staff.

-.. recognises the achievements of teams and staff and adheres to the agreed-upon model

The Markers are NOT linear – an example

Example: BP Progress MarkersBP develops and put in place a communication policy guiding how information is shared within the organisation

P3

… schedule regular meetings to communicate the decisions and rationale of board meetings

P2

… frequently interacts with staff to exchange ideas and provide clarity and consistency in the formulation and implementation of policies

P1

... recruit and retain competent management teams and holding these reporting officers accountable for their work outputs

P2

... conduct performance appraisals with their staff members P2/3

The Markers are NOT linear – an example

Conclusions and Recommendations

The whole set

is developed

Expect to see

Like to see

Love to see

P1: Building interest, capacity

P2: Involved, promoting

P3: Owning & sustaining

Set will depend

on BP alignment

and project

stage

Both approaches can complement each other

EndThank You