The Results Framework—An Innovative Tool for Program Planning and Evaluation

Abstract

This article constitutes a case study of the development and implementation of the “results framework,” an innovative planning and evaluation tool that is rapidly becoming a standard requirement for United States Agency for International Development (USAID) projects. The framework is used in a USAID-funded regional initiative for HIV/AIDS prevention in Central America. This new program evaluation and monitoring tool provides many advantages over traditional evaluation approaches that use outside consultants to provide midterm and end-of-project evaluations. The results-framework process, which spans the life of the project, provides an opportunity for program staff, donors, partners, and evaluators to work as a team to collect and use rich, longitudinal data for project planning, implementation, and evaluation purposes.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Academy for Educational Development . 1996. Central American HIV/AIDS Prevention Project. Washington, DC: Academy for Educational Development.

Brown, L. 1998. Handbook of indicators for USAID/AIDS/STD Programs. (Unpublished report) MEASURE Evaluation Project, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA.

Holosko, M. J. , 1996. Obstacles to conducting program evaluations: Implications for public health evaluators. Journal of Health & Social Policy 8:91-101.

Lincoln, Y. S. , and E. Guba . 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Madrigal, J. P. 1998a. El condon y las trabajadores comerciales del sexo: Encuesta en America Central. (Unpublished editorial ILPES)

Madrigal, J. P. 1998b. El condon y los hombres que tienen sexo con hombres. (Unpublished editorial ILPES)

Mertens, E. T. , and M. Carael . 1997. Evaluation of HIV/STD prevention, care and support: An update on who's approaches. AIDS Education and Prevention 9 (2): 133-145.

Mertens, T., M. Carael, P. Sato, J. Cleland, H. Ward , and G. D. Smith . 1994. Prevention Indicators for Evaluating the Progress of National AIDS Programmes. AIDS 8 (10): 1359-1369.

Panamerican Social Marketing Organization . 1997. PASMO proposal—Executive summary. Panamerican Social Marketing Organization.

10.

Rossi, Peter , and Howard Freeman . 1993. Evaluation, a systematic approach. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

11.

Rossi, P. , and S. Wright . 1967. Evaluation research: An assessment of theory, practice, and politics. Evaluation Quarterly 1 (1): 5-52.

12.

Senate and House of Representatives of the United States Congress . 1993. Government and Performance Act of 1993. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

13.

Suchman, E. 1967. Evaluative Research. New York: Russel Sage.

14.

United States Agency for International Development, Center for Development Information and Evaluation . 1997. Performance monitoring and evaluation tips. Washington, DC: US Agency for International Development.

15.

United States Agency for International Development, Center for Development Information and Evaluation, Bureau for Policy and Program Planning . 1996. Resource book on strategic planning and performance monitoring under reengineering. Washington, DC: US Agency for International Development.

16.

United States Agency for International Development, Guatemala–Central American Projects . 1996. Program Description Central American HIV/AIDS Prevention Project. Washington, DC: US Agency for International Development.

17.

Wellings, K. 1994. Assessing AIDS prevention strategies in Europe: Lessons for evaluative research. In Evaluating AIDS prevention programs, edited by National Research Council . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.