1. IDEV 624 – Monitoring and Evaluation Evaluating Program Outcomes Elke de Buhr, PhD Payson Center for International Development Tulane University

2. Process vs. Outcome/Impact Monitoring Process Monitoring Outcome Impact Monitoring Evaluation LFM USAID Results Framework

3. 2/25/2016 What is the problem? Situation Analysis & Surveillance What are the contributing factors? Determinants Research What interventions and resources are needed? Needs, Resource, Response Analysis & Input Monitoring What interventions can work (efficacy & effectiveness)? Efficacy & Effectiveness Studies, Formative & Summative Evaluation, Research Synthesis Are we implementing the program as planned? Outputs Monitoring What are we doing? Are we doing it right? Process Monitoring & Evaluation, Quality Assessments Are interventions working/making a difference? Outcome Evaluation Studies Are collective efforts being implemented on a large enough scale to impact the epidemic? (coverage; impact)? Surveys & Surveillance Understanding Potential Responses Monitoring & Evaluating National Programs Determining Collective Effectiveness ACTIVITIES OUTPUTS INPUTS OUTCOMES & IMPACTS A Public Health Questions Approach to HIV/AIDS M&E Are we doing the right things? Are we doing them right? Are we doing them on a large enough scale? Problem Identification (UNAIDS 2008)

4. 2/25/2016 Most Some Few* All Input/ Output Monitoring Process Evaluation Outcome Monitoring / Evaluation Levels of Monitoring & Evaluation Effort Number of Projects * Disease impact monitoring is synonymous with disease surveillance and should be part of all national-level efforts, but cannot be easily linked to specific projects Strategic Planning for M&E: Setting Realistic Expectations 4 Impact Monitoring / Evaluation

5. Monitoring Strategy Process  Activities Outcome/Impact  Goals and Objectives

6. Outcome Evaluation

7. Program vs. Outcome Monitoring Program process monitoring: The systematic and continual documentation of key aspects of program performance that assess whether the program is operating as intended or according to some appropriate standard Outcome monitoring: The continual measurement of intended outcomes of the program, usually of the social conditions it is intended to improve Process Monitoring A Form of Impact Evaluation

8. What is an Outcome? Outcome: The state of the target population or the social conditions that a program is expected to have changed 1.Outcomes are characteristics of the target population or social condition, and not of the program 2.Programs expect change but this does not necessarily mean that program targets have changed (Rossi/Lipsey/Freeman 2004)

9. What is your project’s outcome?

10. Outcome vs. Impact Outcome level: Status of an outcome at some point of time Outcome change: Difference between outcome levels at different points in time Impact/program effect: Proportion of an outcome change that can be attributed uniquely to a program as opposed to the influence of some other factor (Rossi/Lipsey/Freeman 2004)

12. Outcome vs. Impact (cont.) Outcome level and change: –Valuable for monitoring program performance –Limited use for determining program effects Impact/program effect: the value added or net gain that would not have occurred without the program and the only part of the outcome for which the program can honestly take credit –Most demanding evaluation task –Time-consuming and expensive

13. Outcome Variable Outcome variable: A measurable characteristic or condition of a program’s target population that could be affected by the actions of the program –Examples: amount of smoking, body weight, school readiness (Rossi/Lipsey/Freeman 2004)

14. What are your project’s outcome variables?

15. Program Impact Theory Useful for identifying and organizing program outcomes Expresses the outcomes of social programs as part of a logic model that connects program theory to proximal (immediate) outcomes, that are expected to lead to distal (long-term) outcomes

16. (Rossi, Peter H et al., p. 143) Program Impact Theory - Examples

17. Logic Model Visual representation of the expected sequence of steps going from program service to client outcome

18. Logic Model - Example (for a teen mother parenting program) (Rossi, P. H. et al., p. 95)

19. Proximal vs. Distal Outcomes Proximal (immediate) outcomes: –Usually the ones that the program has the greatest capability to effect –Often easiest to measure and to attribute to program Distal (longer-term) outcomes –Frequently the ones of the greatest political and practical importance –Often difficult to measure and to attribute to program –Usually influenced by many factors outside of the programs control

20. What are your project’s proximal/distal outcomes?

21. Measuring Program Outcomes Select most important outcomes Take into account feasibility (e.g. distal ones may be too difficult or expensive to measure) However, both proximal and distal outcomes can be subject of an outcome evaluation Multidimensional outcomes often require multiple measurements (  composite measures)

22. Monitoring Program Outcomes Outcome monitoring: –Simplest approach to measuring program outcomes –Similar to process monitoring with the difference that the regularly collected information relates to program outcomes rather than process and performance Requires indicators that are practical to collect routinely and that are informative with regard to program effectiveness

23. Monitoring Strategies Time XO1O1 O2O2 O4O4 O6O6 O2O2 O1O1 O3O3 XO5O5 O3O3 O4O4 XO1O1 O2O2 XX

24. Selecting Outcome Indicators Need to be as responsive as possible to program effects –Include only members of target population receiving services –Not include data on beneficiaries who dropped out of the program (  service utilization issue) The best outcome indicators, short of an impact evaluation, are: –Variables that only the program can effect –Variables that are central to the program’s mission

25. Selecting Outcome Indicators (cont.) Concerns with selecting outcome indicators: –“Teaching to the test”: Program staff may focus on critical outcome indicators to improve program performance on these measures, may distort program activities –“Corruptibility of indicators”: Monitoring data should be collected by outside evaluator, or with careful processes in place that prevent distortion (Role of participation?)

26. Advantage of Outcome Monitoring Useful and relatively inexpensive information about program effects, usually in a reasonable timeframe (compared to impact evaluation)  Mainly a technique for improving program administration, and not for assessing its impact on the social conditions it intends to benefit (Rossi/Lipsey/Freeman 2004)

27. Limitation of Outcome Monitoring Requires indicators that identify change and link that change to the program However, often many outside influences on a social condition (confounding factors)  Isolating program effects may require the special techniques of impact evaluation

28. Project Monitoring Plan Objective 1: Monitoring Strategy: What (Indicators)How (Methods and Tasks) WhenWhoWhere

29. Logframe GoalOVIsMOVsAssumptions/Ri sks Purpose Outputs Activities (Inputs) Milestones TAPGR: Development Project Planning

30. Discussion Questions

31. How could the outcome of your program be monitored? What are the critical outcome variables? What outcome monitoring strategy is feasible taking into account the local implementation environment? What are the strengths of this methodology? What are its weaknesses? How would you judge the quality of the collected data?