Guide to the Participatory Outcomes Definition Process

This guide outlines a structured, participatory process for key stakeholders of the STEP UP project to collaboratively define a set of SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound) outcomes.

The goal is to create a shared understanding and ownership of the project's intended results, which will form the basis for the project's Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Framework. The process is designed to translate the high-level objectives in the Terms of Reference (ToR) into concrete, actionable statements of achievement.

• Collaborative: All key stakeholders have a voice in defining success.
• ToR-Grounded: All outcomes must directly align with the project's purpose and scope as defined in the ToR.
• Evidence-Based: Decisions should be informed by existing data and an understanding of the Cambodian education context.
• Ownership: The process aims to build collective ownership of the project's goals among implementers and beneficiaries.

Step 1: Stakeholder mapping and engagement

Objective: Identify and engage all relevant project stakeholders.

The aim is to ensure that all key voices are represented in the outcomes definition process, including governance, implementation, beneficiaries, and partners.

Activities:

• Review the STEP UP ToR to identify all mentioned stakeholders.
• Categorize stakeholders into groups (e.g., governance, implementation, beneficiaries, partners).
• Nominate representatives from each key stakeholder group to participate in the process.

Key stakeholder groups to consider:

• Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport (MoEYS) – Executing Agency (EA)
• Project Management Unit (PMU)
• Implementing Agencies (IAs): Institute of Technology of Cambodia (ITC), National Institute of Education (NIE), Directorate General of Education (DGE)
• Project Implementation Units (PIUs)
• School leaders and principals (from USSs, GTHSs, SRSs)
• Upper secondary STEM teachers
• Provincial and District Offices of Education (POE/DOE)
• Project Implementation Support Consultants (PIC Team)
• Private sector and industry partners
• Student representatives

Step 2: Foundational workshop – defining the vision

Objective: Establish a shared vision and understanding of project goals.

Activities:

• Convene all nominated stakeholder representatives for a kick-off workshop.
• Present and discuss the core objectives from the ToR (Section I):
  • Increase access to quality education.
  • Strengthen STEM teaching and learning.
  • Strengthen educational leadership and management capacity.
• Facilitate a visioning exercise.

Guiding questions for the workshop:

• Looking ahead 5 years to the end of the project, what does “success” look like for an upper secondary school student in Cambodia?
• What is the single most important change this project should achieve in STEM education?
• How will we know if educational leadership and management have been “strengthened”? What will school principals be doing differently?
• What are the critical challenges in the current system that these outcomes must address?

Step 3: Thematic working groups – drafting initial outcomes

Objective: Draft initial outcome statements by intervention area.

Activities:

• Divide workshop participants into thematic working groups based on the project components detailed in the ToR.
• Each group drafts 2–4 high-level outcome statements describing intended changes in conditions, behaviors, or systems.

Suggested thematic working groups:

• STEM Pedagogy & Teacher Development: CPD, STEM Framework, competency-based teaching, lab safety.
• EdTech & Information Systems: OpenEMIS rollout, classroom technology integration, digital content.
• School Leadership & Management: School-based management, capacity building for school leaders.
• Student Pathways & Partnerships: Career guidance, PPPs, harmonized qualifications framework.
• Gender Equality & Social Inclusion (GESI): GAP implementation, inclusive materials, support for female students in STEM.

Guiding questions for working groups:

• For our theme, what is the most significant change we expect to see by the end of the project?
• Who will benefit from this change (e.g., teachers, students, administrators)?
• How does this change contribute directly to the project's overall goals?
• What would be the observable evidence of this change?

Step 4: Refinement workshop – applying the SMART framework

Objective: Transform draft outcomes into robust SMART outcomes.

Activities:

• Each working group refines its draft outcomes using the SMART criteria checklist in an iterative process of questioning and rewriting.

SMART checklist and guiding questions:

Specific (S): What exactly will be achieved?

• Is the language clear and unambiguous?
• Who is the target group (e.g., 1,000 STEM teachers, principals of 554 USSs)?
• What specific action is involved (e.g., “implement”, “demonstrate”, “utilize”)?
• Example: Instead of “Improve teacher skills,” use “Upper secondary STEM teachers in target schools demonstrate improved pedagogical skills for competency-based science instruction.”

Measurable (M): How will we know it has been achieved?

• What is the indicator of success? What data will be collected?
• What is the source of this data (e.g., EMIS, classroom observation tool, survey, assessment results)?
• What is the baseline? What is the target?
• Example: “The percentage of observed STEM lessons rated as ‘effective’ or ‘highly effective’ increases from 20% to 60%.”

Achievable (A): Is this realistic?

• Can this be accomplished within the project’s 5-year timeframe and budget?
• Do we have the necessary expertise and resources (referencing consultant roles in the ToR)?
• What key assumptions must hold true?

Relevant (R): Why is this important?

• Does this outcome directly support one of the project’s three main objectives?
• Is this outcome a priority for MoEYS?
• Will achieving this outcome contribute to Cambodia’s human capital development agenda?

Time-bound (T): What is the deadline?

• By what year of the project will this outcome be achieved (e.g., “by end of Year 3”)?
• Are there key milestones or annual targets to track progress?
• Example: “…by the end of Year 4 of the project.”

Step 5: Plenary validation and harmonization

Objective: Review the full set of SMART outcomes for coherence and interdependencies.

Activities:

• Reconvene all stakeholders in a plenary session.
• Each working group presents its refined SMART outcomes.
• The facilitator leads a discussion to review the entire set of outcomes.

Guiding questions for plenary review:

• Do the outcomes as a whole cover all critical aspects of the STEP UP project as described in the ToR? Are there gaps?
• Are there overlaps or redundancies between outcomes from different groups?
• Are the targets collectively realistic?
• How do the outcomes depend on each other (e.g., EdTech outcomes enabling measurement of teacher development outcomes)?

Step 6: Finalization and endorsement

Objective: Formalize the agreed outcomes as the foundation for project monitoring.

Activities:

• The PIC Team Leader and M&E Specialists compile the validated SMART outcomes into a formal “Project Outcomes Framework” document.
• The document is circulated to all stakeholders for a final review period.
• The final document is submitted to the PMU and MoEYS for formal endorsement, guiding detailed indicators and M&E plans.