Working

Backwards (not backwards thinking)

Ann Hendrix-Jenkins

Palladium

Soon: Health Policy Plus

October 9, 2015

Capacity

Development

Systems

Thinking

Social

and

Behavior

Change

M&E Other

Sectors

Community Level

* Local here

means…

“The aid game is changing: you are now in a

facilitating and brokering role.” (vs. expert)

– USAID

CD 1.0—training individuals. CD 2.0—supporting

organizations. CD 3.0—systems approach

Strengthen capacity, measure performance.

–David Jacobstein, USAID

USAID FORWARD, Local Systems

8

Immediate implications

Outcome

Harvesting

9

10

What is Outcome Harvesting?

Ricardo Wilson-Grau, Heather Britt, et al ~ Ford Foundation

Connected to Outcome Mapping

Harvest = “what changed, for whom, when and

where, why it matters to the development

objective—the significance of the change—and

how the program contributed to the change.” WB

Stakeholder-centered, qualitative, tacit knowledge

Process…

Works backwards.

What is an “outcome”?

“Observable changes in the behavior,

relationships, activities and actions of

social actors, who in turn were defined

as individuals, groups, organizations or

institutions that were influenced in a

small or large way, directly or indirectly,

intentionally or not by [your project

here].” (BioNET evaluation)

12

Six Iterative Steps

1. Design the Outcome Harvest.

2. Gather data and draft outcome

descriptions

3. Engage change agents in describing

outcomes

4. Substantiate

5. Analyze and interpret

6. Support use of findings --Wilson Grau, Britt

Today’s Mini-

Harvest

activity

Today’s Mini-harvest

Consider the evidence and match

each to the two outcomes

Do they build a convincing case?

What else might be needed?

Mini-harvest Results

What can METSI and SBCHealth

learn about their intervention?

Do you see relevance of this

methodology to what you do?

World Bank conclusions re: OH

Capture tacit and

contextual knowledge

from program

implementation

Use for systematic

learning to maximize

benefits of

interventions

Triangulate outcomes with

other data to validate

results, particularly for

small projects

Seek evidence and

lessons from an

implementation process

Use for client reporting on

results and promoting

learning by doing

17

18

19

Root Change example, Nigeria

STAR Index: measuring degree to which National Anchors and Cluster Members improved organizational capacity to effectively work as an advocacy cluster as a result of the SACE* program.

20

Change Types 1. Adaptive Voice and Accountability Strategy and Tactics 2. Knowledge Exchange 3. Monitoring and Evaluation 4. Member Engagement 5. Member Development 6. Alliance Building 7. Innovation & Experimentation 8. Public Awareness

*Strengthening Advocacy and

Civic Engagement

Capacity

Development

Systems

Thinking

Social

and

Behavior

Change

M&E Other

Sectors

Community Level

Systems Thinking & M&E

• Barrier: Seems impossibly complicated

to some, i.e. What is a system? How to

draw bounds?

• Iteration and adaptation rather than

linear planning and execution

• Contribution not attribution

• Unintended outcomes are likely and

important—with M you can pick up en

route and iterate.

• Less proving, more improving. (Tx Janine)

Systems Thinking at Community Level

• Community is a system. (Duh!)

• How can systems thinking spotlight

additional “local” stakeholders?

• Implication of “Strengthen Capacity,

Measure Performance”? What is

community capacity? What does

community performance/outcome look

like?

• Capacity to contextualize, adapt, self

renew

System-oriented M & E as part of

capacity development process

for sustained transformation.

• Aligning understanding (constructivist,

schema, concept mapping—early and

often)

• Systematic thought, critical thinking

• Peer learning, dialogue

• Adaptation

• Innovation

• Integration (connecting dots skill set)