Outcome Mapping in Honduras

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

Outcome Mapping: Pros

• Conceptually Easy to Accept

• Responds to Many Measuring Needs– Qualitative Variables– Complexity of Human Behaviour

• Sustainability of Human Processes

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”

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

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)