SUSTAINABLE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT: HIERARCHICAL CAUSAL SYSTEMS

11/05/16 Prepared by Bongs Lainjo
Sustainable Program
Management : Hierarchical
Causal Systems
Bongs Lainjo, MASc Engineering
Author “M and E: Data Management
Systems” and
Former UN Senior Advisor
Website: bsuiru.wordpress.com
Canadian Conference on Global & International Studies
(GIS2016) Toronto, Canada, 24-25 September 2016

Presentation Outline
 Background;
 Highlights;
 Objectives;
 Relevance;
 Target Audience;
 Program Life Cycle (PLC);
 Themes;
 Program Definition;
 Model Determinants – Hierarchical Causal Systems;
 Model Definition;
 CARROT – BUS Model;
 Conclusion.

Background
 Over six decades of foreign Assistance;
 Significant funding by bi and multi lateral Agencies;
 Mixed outcomes;
 Limited Availability of Standards;
 Significant gaps between Implementing Agencies and
Development partners;
 Limited impact of the Paris Declaration;
 Limited Coordination Mechanisms;
 Significant Levels of Duplication ;
 Ubiquitous degree of vertical Programming;
 Top-Down Approach;
 Limited Common Understanding of attribution;
 Compelling need of a model like CARROT-BUS

Highlights
 Hierarchical Model;
 Based on Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs concept;
 Inclusive (Development Partners);
 Holistic ( Program Management);
 Generic ;
 Bottom Up Strategy (BUS);
 Causality-based ;
 Well-Defined Determinants;
 Synergistic Components;
 Unique Characteristics;
 Original Design;
 Based on Extensive Research and Field Experience;
 Practical;
 Logical;
 Comprehensive.

OBJECTIVES: General
To Strengthen and Standardize Program
Management Protocols;
To address existing nuances, highlighting
the synergies that exist among the different
hierarchical levels of the model.

OBJECTIVES: Specific
Streamline Program management by improving
and refining causal links at all hierarchical levels
(HLs);
Mitigate Program Duplication;
Establish authentic contributions between
different HLs;
Establish meaningful synergies among different
HLs: emphasizing Systematic and Logical
implementation;

OBJECTIVES : Specific (Cont’d)
Strengthen and Standardize the program
design and Management;
Promote a common understanding among
key actors and
Minimize cost and optimize the level of
understanding among different
stakeholders.

Relevance
Improves intended and unintended
intervention results and makes foreign aid
more focused with evidence-based results;
Establishes more effective, continuous and
sustainable synergies among Frontline
Forces, IAs, Funding Agencies,
Stakeholders and Beneficiaries.

Target Audience
Funding Agencies;
Implementing Agencies;
Program Managers;
Relevant Stakeholders;
Program Evaluators;
Development Agencies.

Program Life Cycle

Themes
Health;
Education;
Environment;
Governance;
Poverty;
Judiciary;
Agriculture;
Social Security and Protection.

Program Definition
Prepared by:- Bongs Lainjo,2016
A program is defined as: Different
thematic and complementary sub-
sets or projects (micro) designed to
effectively contribute in tandem to
a common set (macro).
Note: If there is ONLY one
Project funded and implemented, THEN
Project = Program

ALGORITHM
Prepared by:- Bongs Lainjo, 2016
Algorithm:
Parameter Definition
Phase
Pgm = Total
# of Programs
ProjNum= Total
# of Projects
Proj = Current
Project
Initialization
Phase
START
Program = Pgm
Sub-Set= SS
Project= Proj
SS = Proj
Pgm= 1
Proj = 0
ProjNum = 5
Track

Prepared by:- Bongs Lainjo,2016
Tracking Project
Implementation
{Implementation
Phase}
Decision Phase
Common Set
(Program)
Proj = Proj + 1
ProjNum = ProjNum-1
IMPLEMENTATION
Proj = NumProj?
Results
N
o
Track
End of
Implementation
Yes

Pyramid Definition:
Enabling Environment
The availability of appropriate, relevant
and sustainable laws, policies, political
stability, advocacy of effective
coordination mechanisms and strategies to
enable the successful realization of
planned objectives/outcomes and
contributing to an overall higher goal.

Pyramid Definition:
Capacity Development
 Capacity building occupies the lowest rung of the CARROT-BUS
model. The concept of capacity building refers to both the
development of an individual or a group of citizens as a whole to
perform tasks they themselves can sustain which enable them to
grow and improve in educational, know how and economic terms,
and in their willingness to exercise social responsibilities beyond
those dictated by family-kinship mores, religious precepts, and social
norms of their ethnicity. In this model, key components of capacity
building include workshops, training programs, skills update,
operations research, community mobilization, appropriate campaign
activities and creating community awareness. The reason why this is
crucial has something to do with actual experience wherein aid
funded programs could not deliver results on time due to lack of
government capacity.

Pyramid Definition:
Accountability
 The concept of accountability is to ensure that
individuals, communities, NGOs, governments and
donors are aware of what it is they are expected to do or
accomplish. A senior international executive, Toben
Rick, used the acronym SIMPLE to emphasize the
meaning of the word accountable. "S" = setting of
expectations. "I " = The need to invite commitment. "M"
= A way to measure progress. "P" = Provision of
feedback. "L" = The link to rewards and punishments. A
sound management plan must have precisely defined
consequences for producing both the right as well as the
wrong result(s). "E" = Evaluation of results.

Pyramid Definition:
Resources
 Resources normally consist of the written plans, funds,
materials, equipment, technologies, trainings needed,
and/or expertise necessary to produce the desired results.
The timely delivery of essential resources is also part of
this conundrum and designing and maintaining a
sufficiently flexible administrative systems through
which the aforementioned physical and technical
resources are most effectively delivered is usually a
major challenge. A significant gap often exists between
the provision of essential resources and accountability for
their value when delivered.

Pyramid Definition:
Results
 Whereas the first three elements -capacity, accountability
and resources- are often grouped together and labeled as
'inputs', a result is the first of three outcomes, the others
being ownership of the development process
(sustainability effect) and transparency throughout the
development process. The word result also contains an
element of ambiguity. A result may also be variously
defined as a specific output, a more general outcome or
purpose, or as the achievement of a broader goal. The
first law of results is that each one has to be quantifiable
in order to be measurable. These can either be intended,
unintended, positive or negative. The creation of
ownership and the achievement of transparency, while
also results in some sense, are usually more difficult to
define in immediate and measurable terms.

Pyramid Definition:
Ownership
 This word is often fraught with ambiguity. An OECD
publication states that The Paris Declaration placed
emphasis on 'ownership' as referring primarily to
developing countries governments' abilities to "exercise
leadership over their development policies and strategies
and co-ordinate development actions." Since then, the
international dialogue has recognized the need for
broader definitions of ownership. The Accra Agenda for
Action (2008) expanded the concept of ownership from
merely the executive branch of whatever host government
the donor was dealing with "to the broader society of that
country as owners of development efforts." Ideally,
ownership of the development process should be from
start to finish, regardless of achieved outcome.

Pyramid Definition:
Transparency
 Transparency in foreign aid assistance is defined by
Moon & Williamson as the “comprehensive availability
and accessibility of aid flow information in a timely,
systematic, and comparable manner that allows public
participation in government accountability.” Ideally,
transparency assumes everybody involved in a
development program is capable and well qualified to
adhere to the management and fiscal accounting systems
and to execute approved plans.

Conclusion
 Results of foreign aid and international development continue to be
mixed;
 There is both compelling anecdotal and scientific evidence that
foreign aid outcomes have ranged from dismal to reasonable;
 Many beneficiaries continue to live in squalid conditions;
 Poverty remains ubiquitous despite reports to the contrary and
improved quality of life in vulnerable populations remains a distant
dream;
 Above all, Western countries have woefully failed to meet their own
pledges to donate 0.7 % of their GDP to LDCs. Only a disappointing
number of countries- four- have achieved this objective;
 The Paris declaration that promulgated to address most
developmental concerns has been quite disappointing too;
 Hence an urgent need for a streamlined and effective paradigm shift
is not only required but necessary. CARROT-BUS is one attempt to
fill these gaps.

www.bsuiru.wordpress.com

25
Thank You

SUSTAINABLE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT: HIERARCHICAL CAUSAL SYSTEMS

More Related Content

What's hot (8)

Viewers also liked (13)

Similar to SUSTAINABLE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT: HIERARCHICAL CAUSAL SYSTEMS (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

SUSTAINABLE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT: HIERARCHICAL CAUSAL SYSTEMS