NLM Gateway
A service of the U.S. National Institutes of Health
Your Entrance to
Resources from the
National Library of Medicine
    Home      Term Finder      Limits/Settings      Search Details      History      My Locker        About      Help      FAQ    
Skip Navigation Side Barintended for web crawlers only

"But what's the result?": strategic planning for a regional HIV prevention project using a "results framework" approach.

Niblett GR, Stalker M, Jimerson A, O'Connor P, Terrell S, O'Hanlon B; International Conference on AIDS.

Int Conf AIDS. 1996 Jul 7-12; 11: 374 (abstract no. Th.C.4785).

Academy for Educational Development, Washington, DC, USA. Fax: 202-884-8752. E-mail: gniblett@aed.org.

Issues: Multilateral donors like the US Agency for International Development (USAID) apply standard methods to strategic planning for projects. How does application of a "results framework" approach alter program planners' mind set and thinking for start-up of a regional HIV/AIDS project? Will a focus on results, rather than on inputs or process or activities, lead to more strategic activities plans and clearer evaluation plans? Project: USAID/G-CAP applied a results framework in collaborating with contractors and local representatives to develop a 5-year plan for its new AIDS Action Project for Central America. The planning group agreed upon an overall "strategic objective" and then looked ahead to two intermediate resultsPone for an improved policy environment and one for strengthened NGOsPthat define how planners envision the end-of-project results. Only once they had articulated those results and concrete indicators to measure those results did the planners set out activity plans. Results: The project planners identified several advantages to "planning for results": 1) a clear and constant focus on results that are defined in terms of the end customer; 2) increased accountability for ensuring that project activities really "enhance Central American capacity to respond to the HIV crisis," and not just that those activities are completed; 3) fewer planning steps and less onerous monitoring tasks than in previous project plans; 4) evaluation measures that are anticipated and built into the project plan; 5) workplans and evaluation plans that flow from and point to expected results; 6) clearer mutual agreement between donor and contractor on the project's vision and strategies, since planning is collaborative. The paper will present the final results package plan for the AIDS Action Project for Central America. Lessons Learned: By answering first the questions, "Where do we want to end up?" and "How will we know that we've arrived?" planners can more confidently develop concrete work plans and interim indicators to ensure they remain focused on what really matters in HIV/AIDS prevention.

Publication Types:
  • Meeting Abstracts
Keywords:
  • Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome
  • Central America
  • Demography
  • Goals
  • Government Agencies
  • HIV Infections
  • HIV Seropositivity
  • Health Planning
  • Public Policy
  • education
  • methods
Other ID:
  • 96925090
UI: 102220989

From Meeting Abstracts




Contact Us
U.S. National Library of Medicine |  National Institutes of Health |  Health & Human Services
Privacy |  Copyright |  Accessibility |  Freedom of Information Act |  USA.gov