First phase of implementation(2005-2006)
  1. Programmatic alignment to MDGs, other impact indicators and underlying causes of poverty
  2. Development of impact measurement systems that measure impact at the project and national levels.
  3. Baseline data: process for application and main lessons
  4. New AOP format and priorities
  5. Adapted data gathering tools

Second phase of implementation (January 2007 to present)
1. Formed an OP&L team that consisted of the ACD, M&E coordinator, IT , HR and Finances. This team dedicated time at first to understand the logic of the system (for what is it useful?) and the data gathering tools.
2. Identified the organizational structure and spaces in which the system would operate and through which the information would flow (see slides 5,9,10 and 11 of Peru’s powerpoint presentation)
Spaces in which the system would operate are:
      1. Senior management team (Jay, Milo, the tour people responsible for program support areas (finances, HR, administration and IT), plus two rotational members from the field).
      2. Expanded senior management team (members of senior management team, plus coordinators of programmatic teams, rotational members and representatives from certain projects)
      3. Programmatic teams
      4. Project teams
    1. Identified information flows that would need to occur within and between the aforementioned groups. Schedules for information flows were determined (data collection, analysis, and review for learning, planning and decision making) in accordance with regional and organization-wide processes.
3. Identified roles and functions for individuals and groups
4. Trained a network of 25 facilitators in the use and application of the data gathering instruments A, B and C. Facilitators learned to apply the tools in ways that would promote learning and reflection of the Project teams. These facilitators also follow up and monitor actions that support information flows between the different groups.
5. Expanded its project management information system to incorporate a component for the OP&L. This system facilitates data entry, storage, analisis and reporting of OP&L data. This system will need to be linked to a regional or global performance information system once it is developed.
6. Presented the OP&L to staff at different levels so that they understand its importance and implications for the organization. This has occurred in various meetings, such as the June 2007 meeting with the expanded senior management team (as well as the November 2007 CARE-wide meeting?)

Ideas for Peru section of Case Study

  1. CARE-Peru collects baseline data and uses this data to prepare 2007 AOP
Explain main findings of CARE-Peru’s baseline and the strategic directions that these findings helped set for the 2006 and/or 2007 AOPs. For example, decision was made to focus on improving indicator on empowerment by training RBA facilitators. Perhaps this could be a good moment to explain the relationship between the regional AOP and the CO AOP?
  1. Programmatic alignment to MDGs and UCPs and impact measurement system
Explain the process and results of programmatic alignment (what MDGs, other impact indicators and UCPs were identified?), organizational restructuring, and the development of an impact measurement system that is also aligned to the MDGs and UCPs.
  1. Adaptation of OP&L data gathering tools to the UCPs and programmatic priorities that resulted from the programmatic alignment and restructuring process.
  2. Gathering the data and promoting learning at project team level
  3. Integrating OP&L into organizational structures and planning and decision making processes
    1. Spaces in which the system operates (senior management team, etc.)
    2. Information flows, timeframes, and linkages to regional and organization-wide processes
    3. Identification of roles and functions for individual and groups
  4. Utility of the system – for what has it been useful?

To read the case study in its entirety: