1. Outcome Mapping in Honduras

2. The Context Planning Based Mainly on Logical Framework –Focus on Activities and Products –Impact Measurement M&E mainly as Performance Measurement –Used as a “Control” Tool –Creates Uneasiness on Operative Base

3. Outcome Mapping: Pros Conceptually Easy to Accept Responds to Many Measuring Needs –Qualitative Variables –Complexity of Human Behaviour Sustainability of Human Processes

4. Outcome Mapping: Cons Same Challenges as Any Other Qualitative Measurement System Seen as a Complex System Requires Total Commitment of User Donors not too Open to Accept OM Time Consuming Vocabulary –New Terms Create Resistance –No Such Thing as “Socio Directo”

5. Outcome Mapping: Achievements At Least Four of our Boundary Partners are Experimenting with Aspects of OM –Strategic Planning –Project M&E –Academia Three of our Projects use OM as Main M&E Tool

6. Outcome Mapping Challenges Flexibility on Application Flexibility on Vocabulary Education to Donors about Usefulness of OM Better Coupling of OM to Logical Framework and Results Based Management (RBM)