Participatory impact pathways analysis

Definition

Participatory Impact Pathways Analysis (PIPA) is an approach for developing a logic model for one or more projects/programs in a workshop setting. The approach was first used in a workshop in January 2006 in Ghana, with seven projects funded by the Challenge Program on Water and Food. Nine PIPA workshops have been held since then for 46 projects. A paper describing the approach has been accepted for publication in the Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation.

PIPA helps workshop participants surface, discuss and write down their assumptions and theories about how their project activities and outputs could eventually contribute to desired goals such as poverty reduction. The description of these assumptions and theories is a description of the project’s (or program’s) impact pathways. PIPA has helped workshop participants with the following:

• Clarify and communicate the their own project’s logic of intervention and its potential for achieving impact
• Understand other projects and identify areas for collaboration
• Generate a feeling of common purpose and better programmatic integration
• Produce an impact narrative describing the project's intervention logic
• Produce a framework for subsequent monitoring and evaluation

When PIPA works best

PIPA is useful when two or more projects in the same program wish to better integrate. At least two people for each project should attend, preferably the project leader and some else who knows the project and has time and inclination to follow up on what comes out of the workshop. PIPA also works well when one project wishes to build common understanding and commitment from its stakeholders. In this case, two or more representatives from each important stakeholder group should attend.

The PIPA process

PIPA can be used at the beginning of a project, in the middle or at the end as way of documenting and learning from the project. PIPA describes project (or program) impact pathways in two ways: (i) causal chains of activities, outputs and outcomes through which a project is expected to achieve its purpose and goal; and (ii) networks of evolving relationships between project implementing organizations, stakeholders and ultimate beneficiaries that are necessary to achieve the goal. The workshop process, shown in the diagram, develops the two perspectives in turn and then integrates them. After the workshop the outputs can be written up in an impact narrative, similar to John Mayne’s (2004) performance stories, and/or can be used to develop an evaluation plan.

References

1. The Participatory Impact Pathways Analysis Wiki contains more information about PIPA and many more references than listed here

2. The main reference for PIPA is this journal article Douthwaite, B., Alvarez, B.S., Cook, S., Davies, R., George, P., Howell, J., Mackay, R. and Rubiano, J. (Accepted). The Impact Pathways Approach: A Practical Application of Program Theory in Research-for-Development . Submitted to the Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation

3. PIPA grew out of work in Northern Nigeria described in these two articles Douthwaite, B., Schulz, S., Olanrewaju, A., Ellis-Jones, J. (2007). [Impact pathway evaluation of an integrated Striga hermonthica control project in Northern Nigeria. Agricultural Systems. 92 pp 201-222

4. Douthwaite, B., T. Kuby, E. van de Fliert and S. Schulz. (2003). Impact Pathway Evaluation: An approach for achieving and attributing impact in complex systems. Agricultural Systems 78 pp243-265

5. This is the key reference for developing impact narratives based on the output of a PIPA workshop Mayne, J. 2004. Reporting on outcomes: setting performance expectations and telling performance stories. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation Vol. 19 (1) pp. 31-60

6. This is the key reference for the use of causal analysis / problem trees in the PIPA process Renger, R. and Titcomb, A. 2002. A Three-Step Approach to Teaching Logic Models American Journal of Evaluation. 23: 493-503