Mapa-Project: A Practical Guide to Integrated Project Planning and Evaluation
Lucinia Bal (collab.)
Budapest: Open Society Institute (OSI);Institute for Educational Policy (IEP) (2001), 132 pp.
Contains bibliogr. pp. 120-123, glossary
ISBN 963-7316-96-5
CC BY
Signature commbox: 00-Management-E 2001
"The most important point for all types of workshops is that the participation of the representatives of all relevant stakeholder groups is ensured. This goes beyond mere discussion: at some stage there is always the necessity to make binding decisions. At this point, the workshop participants must be empowered by their respective organisations and/or groups (constituencies) to make such binding decisions (commitments concerning the use of people, materials, equipment, time, and money).
A second important point for all types of workshops is the recommended use of a team of two facilitators. Years of experience in the context of organisations in the field of development have clearly demonstrated the advantage of having two facilitators rather than only one: a single facilitator simply cannot keep track of all the details of the group processes and, at the same time, keep the discussion focussed along the lines of the previously agreed agenda. Therefore, it is essential that the two facilitators compare their perceptions in the breaks between sessions and take turns in facilitating. Their perceptions thus gain in objectivity and their activity is less influenced by the emotional and cognitive strain that group processes invariably produce.
It should also be obvious that the less the facilitators are directly involved in the project under discussion, the more efficiently they will work. The more they are "outsiders," the more impartial they can be towards the expression of (sometimes diverging) interests in the processes of discussion and negotiation that are the essence of the MAPA-PROJECT workshops. This will not only increase the trust of all participants in the results of the workshop (i.e. the project plan), it will also enhance the credibility of this plan in the eyes of outside organisations, such as a funding organisation. For the same reason it is often advisable to conduct the workshop on "neutral grounds" (i.e., in a location different from that of the organisation which will be running the project)." (Overview, page 21)
A second important point for all types of workshops is the recommended use of a team of two facilitators. Years of experience in the context of organisations in the field of development have clearly demonstrated the advantage of having two facilitators rather than only one: a single facilitator simply cannot keep track of all the details of the group processes and, at the same time, keep the discussion focussed along the lines of the previously agreed agenda. Therefore, it is essential that the two facilitators compare their perceptions in the breaks between sessions and take turns in facilitating. Their perceptions thus gain in objectivity and their activity is less influenced by the emotional and cognitive strain that group processes invariably produce.
It should also be obvious that the less the facilitators are directly involved in the project under discussion, the more efficiently they will work. The more they are "outsiders," the more impartial they can be towards the expression of (sometimes diverging) interests in the processes of discussion and negotiation that are the essence of the MAPA-PROJECT workshops. This will not only increase the trust of all participants in the results of the workshop (i.e. the project plan), it will also enhance the credibility of this plan in the eyes of outside organisations, such as a funding organisation. For the same reason it is often advisable to conduct the workshop on "neutral grounds" (i.e., in a location different from that of the organisation which will be running the project)." (Overview, page 21)
"MAPA stands for Método Aplicado de Planeamento e Avaliação (Method for Applied Planning and Assessment). It was developed by Ulrich Schiefer and António Batista. Leonor Gandra, Carla Batista and Marina P. Temudo contributed to the first manual developed for the Portuguese Co-operation Institute, ICP" (Page 1)
PART I: WHAT IS MAPA?
Introduction, 11
Integrated Participatory Project Planning and Evaluation in Perspective, 12
A MAPA-Project Overview, 21
PART II: MAPA "STEP BY STEP" 25
NORMAL PLANNING, 26
EVALUATION, 37
Normal Evaluation, 39
Evaluation with Re-planning, 46
Fast-Track Planning, 55
Fast-Track Evaluation, 60
PART III: APPENDICES, 63
Appendix 1: Checklist for the Preparation of Workshops, 64
Appendix 2: Facilitation, 66
Appendix 3: Visualisation, 68
Appendix 4: Problem Diagnosis: Problem "Clouds", 70
Appendix 5: Defining Goals and Objectives, 73
Appendix 5a: Problem "Trees" and Objective "Trees", 74
Appendix 5b: The Eisenhower Model, 77
Appendix 6: The Logical Framework (Logframe) Method, 78
Appendix 7: The Project Implementation Plan, 82
Appendix 7a: Monitoring of Activities, 84
Appendix 7b: The Gantt Schedule for the Preparation of a Planning Workshop, 85
Appendix 7c: The Gantt Schedule for the Preparation of an Evaluation Meeting, 88
Appendix 8: The "Mopping Up" Exercise, 91
Appendix 9: The "Kill the Project!" Exercise, 92
Appendix 10: Risk Analysis, 93
Appendix 11: Stakeholder Analysis, 94
Appendix 12: Target Group Analysis, 95
Appendix 13: Partner Analysis, 96
Appendix 14: Analysis of the Institutional Framework, 98
Appendix 15: Gender Analysis, 100
Appendix 16: Viability Studies, 103
Appendix 17: The Monitoring and Evaluation System, 104
Appendix 18: The Impact Evaluation Matrix, 106
Appendix 19: Format for a Project Document, 115
Appendix 20: Format for an Evaluation Report, 116
Appendix 21: Staff Profiles, 118
Appendix 22: Terms of Reference (TOR), 119
Introduction, 11
Integrated Participatory Project Planning and Evaluation in Perspective, 12
A MAPA-Project Overview, 21
PART II: MAPA "STEP BY STEP" 25
NORMAL PLANNING, 26
EVALUATION, 37
Normal Evaluation, 39
Evaluation with Re-planning, 46
Fast-Track Planning, 55
Fast-Track Evaluation, 60
PART III: APPENDICES, 63
Appendix 1: Checklist for the Preparation of Workshops, 64
Appendix 2: Facilitation, 66
Appendix 3: Visualisation, 68
Appendix 4: Problem Diagnosis: Problem "Clouds", 70
Appendix 5: Defining Goals and Objectives, 73
Appendix 5a: Problem "Trees" and Objective "Trees", 74
Appendix 5b: The Eisenhower Model, 77
Appendix 6: The Logical Framework (Logframe) Method, 78
Appendix 7: The Project Implementation Plan, 82
Appendix 7a: Monitoring of Activities, 84
Appendix 7b: The Gantt Schedule for the Preparation of a Planning Workshop, 85
Appendix 7c: The Gantt Schedule for the Preparation of an Evaluation Meeting, 88
Appendix 8: The "Mopping Up" Exercise, 91
Appendix 9: The "Kill the Project!" Exercise, 92
Appendix 10: Risk Analysis, 93
Appendix 11: Stakeholder Analysis, 94
Appendix 12: Target Group Analysis, 95
Appendix 13: Partner Analysis, 96
Appendix 14: Analysis of the Institutional Framework, 98
Appendix 15: Gender Analysis, 100
Appendix 16: Viability Studies, 103
Appendix 17: The Monitoring and Evaluation System, 104
Appendix 18: The Impact Evaluation Matrix, 106
Appendix 19: Format for a Project Document, 115
Appendix 20: Format for an Evaluation Report, 116
Appendix 21: Staff Profiles, 118
Appendix 22: Terms of Reference (TOR), 119
