The Process of Analysis for Program Design

The process will vary from one Country Office to another, according to the stock of knowledge and experience of an individual CO. Other factors, such as human resource capacity, skill level, financial resources and time will also shape the choices made in conducting the analysis.

In all instances however, the process will prove to be highly iterative, moving back and forth between multiple levels (macro, meso and micro). In this process, the myriad sources of data brought to bear on the situation of vulnerable groups fill information gaps until a fuller picture emerges. There should be frequent analytical moments in this process of gathering data that ask how the issues and findings interrelate or influence one another.

To effectively engage in this cycle of analysis, CARE Country Offices require systems and space to ensure critical reflection and analysis. Continuous analysis should proceed beyond the design phase into all phases of the program cycle, guided by an impact measurement and learning system.

 

Ongoing Analysis Throughout the Program Cycle

Beyond the initial design, ongoing analysis for a single program is essential to detect changes in the environment or related to interventions’ outcomes – both intended and unintended – that affect impact group members. Through integration of ongoing analysis into the program impact measurement and knowledge management systems, a deeper and up-to-date understanding of the context and changes taking place are critical to:

• Ensure program initiatives “Do No Harm’ and are Conflict Sensitive;
• Ensure the program is addressing possible shifting in underlying causes of poverty and social injustice;&
• Understand how impact group priorities, barriers, opportunities and aspirations shift across time; and
• Adapt interventions in light of changes in the context to capitalize on strategic opportunities that emerge over time for more effective programming.

Most environments in which CARE operates are complex and in a constant state of flux. Assumptions must be monitored and the impact of unexpected events in the context on the program assessed. The level of uncertainty or unpredictability will depend not only on the context but its interaction with the program and with the methodological approach. Thus, to minimize surprise and know how to respond to it, continual analysis should be incorporated in the program.

At the macro level, this involves remaining informed on broader trends and developments related to the country context. At the micro level, one way to do this is through the use of participatory learning and action (PLA) methods that enable CARE to work with impact group members to analyze the situation together, prioritize areas for action and collectively plan and develop strategies to overcome them. In CAREs Bangladesh and Nepal, this approach has become the basis of program design and ways of working with communities. In addition to their use in situational analysis and program design, PLA methods also represent a meaningful and empowering means toward understanding impact over time.

As the situation changes, the theory of change to predict future outcomes should be adapted. Programs have 10-15 year time horizons and the distance over which change occurs, in all likelihood, will adjust and re-adjust many times.

Lastly, it is also important to look at the interaction of characteristics from micro, meso and macro levels across space, from the local to the national and at broader levels. This analysis reveals the power dynamics in the interplay between the three levels.

This resource outlines how CARE's East/Central Africa Region has approached the process of situational analysis for Program Design. This discussion is meant to generate innovation in practice from country offices as they engage situational analysis as part of their program design process.

We hope this guide can act as a reference for teams to develop new ideas in analysis to inform learning on situational analysis.

 

Phases of Analysis >>