System and Complexity Monitoring, Evaluation, Research and Learning

A collaboration between Makerere University School of Public Health–ResilientAfrica Network (RAN) and Johns Hopkins University, funded by USAID and carried out between 2015 and 2019, this four-year initiative was a pioneering effort to bring systems thinking and complexity-aware approaches into monitoring, evaluation, research, and learning for development programming. The project began from a clear recognition that traditional, linear evaluation frameworks often fall short when they are applied to complex and adaptive development challenges, and it set out to develop and test better ways of understanding and influencing systemic change.

The initiative pursued four connected objectives. It sought to adapt systems mapping tools, including causal loop diagrams, network analysis, and system archetypes, so that they could be used practically in development contexts. It aimed to develop complexity-aware indicators that could capture emergent properties, feedback loops, and non-linear change that conventional metrics tend to overlook. It worked to create participatory methods that bring diverse stakeholders together to make collective sense of how systems actually behave. Finally, it explored how digital technologies could strengthen real-time learning within complex interventions. To ground these ideas in practice, the research team conducted action research alongside several USAID implementing partners across East Africa, applying the methodologies to programmes in health systems strengthening, resilience building, and governance reform.

A defining innovation of the work was the co-creation of developmental evaluation approaches that positioned evaluators as embedded learning partners rather than external auditors, which allowed adaptive management to continue throughout the life of a programme. The synthesis of the data found that shifting organisational cultures toward more adaptive, learning-oriented ways of working remained genuinely difficult, and this was reflected in discomfort with uncertainty, institutional incentives that reward accountability over learning, and gaps in systems-thinking capacity. These findings were treated as evidence of where the real obstacles lie, and they shaped the practical guidance that the project went on to produce.

The initiative delivered a set of tools and frameworks that practitioners could use directly. These included a complexity-aware monitoring framework for tracking change in dynamic environments, a systems mapping guide written specifically for development practitioners, and a collection of case studies that demonstrated how the methods work across different sectors. The synthesis of the findings also showed that meaningful change in complex programmes often takes forms that standard systems fail to record, and the research therefore developed methods for tracking shifts in relationships, changes in power dynamics, the emergence of new coordination mechanisms, and the evolution of mental models among stakeholders. Alongside this, the project examined the ethical dimensions of complexity-aware evaluation, giving attention to fair representation in participatory processes, transparency about uncertainty in findings, and the balance between adaptation and accountability.

Taken together, the results point to a clear conclusion that emerged from the evidence gathered across the partner programmes. Complexity-aware approaches offered a fuller and more honest picture of how development change actually unfolds, and they equipped programmes to respond to that change while it was still happening rather than only reporting on it afterwards. The synthesis of the data confirmed that embedding learning within programmes, rather than treating evaluation as a separate accountability exercise, produced more useful insight for the people managing those programmes.

The lasting impact of the project extended well beyond its immediate outputs. Its findings and frameworks informed subsequent USAID guidance on adaptive management, which carried the influence of the work into policy and practice far beyond the original partner programmes. In doing so, the initiative helped shape how the wider development field understands, measures, and responds to systemic change.