Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Center for Glocal Studies

EVALUATION PROPOSAL
MAGUARÉ: Memoria, Vida y Construcción

Seminar: Program Evaluation for Community Development and Social Change

Teacher: Dr. Nancy Strichman
Participant: Oscar Santiago Vargas Guevara
I.D.: 777933631
E-Mail: osvg1905@hotmail.com

January 22nd, 2019

 EVALUATION PROPOSAL
MAGUARÉ: Memoria, Vida y Construcción

1. INTRODUCTION
In March 2017, the Fundación Escuelas de Paz (FEP) kickstarted a two-year programme in four
municipalities in Colombia, affected by the armed conflict, with a grant from the US Agency for
International Development (USAID). The programme, entitled MAGUARÉ: Memoria, Vida y
Construcción, aimed to foster reconciliation and economic development through the recovery
of collective memory, the strengthening of social capital and the support of cultural
entrepreneurship projects. The contract with USAID included the requirement of monitoring
and evaluating outputs and outcomes. With this objective in mind, the FEP appointed Oscar
Vargas, who was active in the designing of the project, to carry out an internal evaluation. This
evaluation proposal includes the general scope of the project evaluation, its intended
methodology for gathering and analyzing data, as well as a review of how similar projects
approach this sort of evaluations on the field.

2. EVALUATION SCOPE
The general research question of this evaluation is:
How has the FEP’s Maguaré project fostered the reconstruction of social capital in the San
Vicente del Caguán municipality?
This overarching question answers to the following specific objectives.
1. To evaluate the short and mid-term results of the project’s 12-month process with its
first cohort of participants in San Vicente del Caguán in terms of social capital
generation.
2. To genereate insights and recommendations that can help the organization better plan
and execute the process for their second cohort of participants, as well as all future
projects.
3. To collect specific narratives of positive transformation brought about by the project.
For the purposes of this evaluation, the research team adopts Bourdieu’s definition of social
capital as “the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a
durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and
recognition”1. Putnam elaborates: “[w]hereas physical capital refers to physical objects and
1
Bourdieu, Pierre (1986) The Forms of Capital. In: J. Richardson (ed.) Handbook of Theory and
Research for the Sociology of Education. New York: Greenwood, p. 249
human capital refers to the properties of individuals, social capital refers to connections among
individuals – social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from
them. A society of many virtuous but isolated individuals is not necessary rich in social capital” 2.
In these terms, this evaluation looks at how relationships of trust have developed between
members of the community, how negative perceptions of the Other have been deconstructed,
and, more generally, how inclined community members are to helping eachother out and
working together.
In order to observe these processes of trust building between community members and groups,
this evaluation centers on the macrolevel of interaction. While individual transformations and
perceptions will be noted, specifically during the interviews, the focus of this evaluation lies on

The present project evaluation will limit its scope to the first cohort in one community: San
Vicente del Caguán, mounting to 30 direct beneficiaries in a one-year timespan (March 2017 –
March 2018). Beyond financial considerations, there are several reasons for this reduction of
the geographic scope. The four municipalities where the project was implemented share
several similarities: (1) all four municipalities were deeply affected by the armed conflict,
considering that the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) had a presence in all of
them and clashes with the military were frequent; (2) in all municipalities, inhabitants rely on
livestock as their main legal source of income; (3) all municipalities currently face an influx of
returning migrants from urban centres, who had been previously displaced by the conflict.
Considering these similarities, some of the findings of this evaluation can be extrapolated.
The intended audience for this evaluation is the staff of the FEP.

CONTEXT AND DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT

The prolonged and complex armed conflict in Colombia has been the main driver of a mass
displacement from rural areas towards the main urban centres throughout the last five
decades. Today, it is calculated that 8,3 million hectares of land have been forcefully annexed
or abandoned3. Besides of the negative economic and psicosocial effects suffered by those in
conditions of those uprooted, the consequences of forced displacement go beyond. “Not only
have we lost the people, we have also lost their teachings, their ‘cultural patrimony’, their
experience in dealing with specific issues, their traditions, the legacy they leave behind” 4. This
results in a complex psicosocial situation of unbelonging, which implies disorientation,
2
Putnam, Robert (2000) Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New
York: Simon & Schuster, p. 19
3
Centro Nacional de Memoria Histórica (2015) “Una Nación Desplazada: Informe Nacional del
Desplazamiento Forzado en Colombia”, CNMH: Bogotá p. 16
frustration, fear and insecurity. The end of the armed conflict, on the other hand, also
represents challenges for the low-scale agricultural sector, either in the transition towards legal
crops or in the diversification of their productive activity. Although the return of many victims
of forced displacement to their homes is expected, as an integral component of the
postconflict, the lack of economic possibilities raises doubts about the sustainability of said
migration.
With the objective of tackling these challenges, the FEP kickstarted the programme MAGUARÉ:
Memoria, Vida y Construcción with a USAID grant in March 2017. The Maguaré is “a percussion
instrument, used for ritual and social communication since many hundreds of years by several
native groups in the Amazonian rainforest. It is simultaneously a symbol of union and
communion”5. Along these principled lines, the eponymous project was aimed at youth in four
municipalities that suffered the consequences of the Colombian armed conflict, and it intended
to develop cultural entrepreneurship on the basis of community resilience and a culture of
peace. Through entrepreneurship, MAGUARÉ intended to empower a group of female and male
youth as agents of change, while simultaneously creating opportunities for social and economic
inclusion. Cultural entrepreneurships are understood here as a productive initiative in the
framework of cultural industries, i.e. “industries that combine the creation, production and
commercialization of contents that are intangible and cultural in nature” 6.
To this end, the project integrated three components/processes, each with a specific set of
objectives and activities: (1) Collective Memory, (2) Reconstruction of Cultural Identity, (3)
Cultural Entrepreneurship. The first two processes aimed to acknowledge individual and
collective memory, re-appropriate regional and local identities and practices in line with
cultural, productive and environmental traditions. These findings constitute the basis on which
participants started to formulate project proposals of cultural entrepreneurship during the third
and final process. From these proposals, the most promising ones were selected by an
independent committee; these subsequently received a starting seed capital of 500 USD, as
well as technical assistance and follow-up during its first year of execution. These three
processes are chronological, and they build on each other. For a graphic interpretation of the
project’s Theory of Change, see Annex 1. Due to the necessity of employing a varied range of
expertise for each individual process, the project was developed together by the FEP, the
Corporación de Investigación y Acción Social, and PRANA Incubadora de Industrias Creativas.

4
Gómez, Oscar: “Memoria, Identidad y Cultura para el Fortalecimiento organizativo”, ed. Elena Martin, Own
translation, Bogotá: Corporación Apoyo a Víctimas de violencia Sociopolítica Pro Recuperación Emocional
(2002), p. 25
5
Editorial (2018) “Presentación”, Maguaré: Revista del Departamento de Antropología 32(1), Universidad
Nacional de Colombia, pg. 3, Own translation
6
UNESCO (2000) Culture, Trade and Globalization: Questions and Answers, Paris: UNESCO, pg. 11
The project was carried out in four municipalities: San Vicente del Caguán, Florencia, Arauca
and Arauquita. The number of participants per municipality was determined based on the
municipality’s total population, in order to avoid selection bias. In order to guarantee a gender
balance, as well as a representation of minorities, at least 40% of participants were meant to be
women, and at least 10% members of afro-descendant and/or indigenous populations.
Additionally, the entire project was meant to last two full years, comprising the same set of
activities and processes for two cohorts per community, one each year. In total, the project
intended to have 320 direct, and 2400 indirect beneficiaries.

ANNEX 1: THEORY OF CHANGE

There are both strengths and weaknesses to this approach. Its largest advantage is that it
allows an eagle-eye view of the project as a whole. Rather than looking at the dynamics and
possible flaws within each of the components – also an important task on its own –, it centers
our attention on the linkages between them. It does not analyze whether a specific module, e.g.
‘collective time-line building’, or ‘a map of myself’ is effective at attaining set specific objectives,
such as developing the participant’s sense of self-awareness and self-efficacy, or encouraging
positive dialogue and exchange about collective traumatic experiences. Instead, it sets an
accent on whether work and discussion on individual memory, as well as the promotion of
dialogue and self-observation through ethnographic tools, can indeed foster an entrepreneurial
spirit focused on cultural industries. Given the complexity of this project – as seen in the
amount of themes it deals with and the number of organizations involved –, it seems more
urgent to carry out a global examination of its underlying logic.
On the downside, looking at such a complex project globally presents the challenge of
unavailable relevant literature. Since the three project components stem from radically
different academic and programmatic traditions, the respective methodological literature
diverges significantly. For instance, existing literature on cultural entrepreneurship focuses
almost solely on the business and marketing plans of the individual entrepreneurships, rather
than on the pedagogical process itself. For instance, Afolabi’s discussion of Terra Kulture’s
approach to cultural entrepreneurship in Nigeria simplifies the process into four main criteria:
(1) purpose of the cultural institution, (2) audience, (3) artistic growth, and (4) artistic quality of
cultural activity7. This approach somewhat echoes Gainer’s typology of the four key pillars of
marketing: (1) product, (2) place, (3) price, and (4) promotion 8. A similar issue presents itself in
the organizational assessment of the Surakata Cultural Entrepreneurship Hub in Indonesia 9; the
evaluation delves into the entire pedagogical process, as well as the stakeholders involved and
their stated social goal. However, it is unable to establish clear links between the activities and
short, mid, and long term outcomes. While these grounded approaches are very relevant to
determining the viability of individual businesses, they fail to account for their broader impact
in society as a whole.
I adapt Morra Imas and Rist’s more general model of a Theory of Change 10. The goal above
refers to the abstract vision of the program, which does not foreclose interventions by different
actors or changing social dynamics. I elaborate on the central assumptions of the project, which
include both an appreciation of the problem, as well as the central logical dynamics of the
7
Afolabi, Taiwo: “A study of cultural entrepreneruship approaches of Terra Kulture”, in: Z. Kofoworola, M.
Owusu & A. Adeoye (eds.). African Theatre: Studies in Theory and Criticism. Ghana: Methodist University
College & Nigeria: University of Ilorin, Pgs. 468-482
8
Gainer, Brenda (2016) “Marketing for Nonprofit Organizations”, In: D. Renz & R. Herman: The Josey-Bass
Handbook of Nonprofit Leadership and Management, New York: Wiley, pgs. 366-395
9
Soerjoatmodjo, Yudhi (2017) “Creative Entrepreneurship Hub Assessment”, Cultural Entrepreneurship Hubs,
URL: https://cultural-entrepreneurship.org/surakata/ [Accessed on: 04/12/2018]
10
Morra Imas, Linda; Rist, Ray (2009) The Road to Results: Designing and Conducting Effective Development
Evaluations, The World Bank, pg. 152
project. ‘Resources’ refers to all the human, material, and social capital brought in by the three
organisations involved in the project. I then delve into the causality chain of the project, from
inputs – I merge Morra Imas and Rist’s inputs and activities in a single category –, through
outputs to outcomes, the latter ones further classified in short, medium and long term.
Furthermore, I classify inputs and outputs within the three components of the project: (1)
Collective Memory, (2) Reconstruction of Cultural Identity, (3) Cultural Entrepreneurship. As
teased out above, the main use of this general theory of change lies in highlighting the relation
between concrete activities on the ground, results, and outcomes. Finally, making external
factors explicit can help understand a project’s failure of success – this is particularly the case in
areas of fragile statehood and environmental vulnerability.
Additionally, compared to other tools such as the logical framework, this theory of change
model brooches the more specific aspects of implementation, such as the concrete activities
and the outputs expected. This contrasts with a logical framework relying solely on general
dynamics, such as the ones presented by Mercy Corps 11 and Oxfam12. In both cases, diagrams
showcase processes in a more-or-less causal representation that centers on general processes
and their outcomes for other processes; one of the simpler depicted dynamics reads:
‘awareness-raising on gender-baised violence’ => ‘improved attitudes to gender-based violence’
=> ‘reduction in incidence of gender-based violence’ 13. Little to no attention, however, is
devoted to the actual activities employed on the ground to further these goals and processes.
This is a conundrum to look into for the evaluation itself – while the format used below
priorizes concrete activities and results, it also overshadows the actual processes and dynamics
that underlie the project, which may prove to be a considerable liability when evaluating
impact.
Arguably, the decision of which model to employ could be reduced in the end to the purpose of
the evaluation, and its time of execution. If, for instance, the evaluation is formative, i.e. carried
out while the project is still ongoing – possibly between cohorts 1 and 2 –, the logical
framework discussed would make more sense since mid- and long-term outcomes are not yet
observable and we could rather analyse the linkages between project components. If, on the
other hand, I am conducting an evaluative assessment, i.e. focusing on outcomes after the end
of the project, the theory of change model below could prove more useful. It remains an open
question to me whether it could be productive to keep both models in mind throughout the
assessment, and to delve into these two different dynamics in parallel.

11
Mercy Corps (n.d.) Evaluation and Assessment of Poverty and Conflict Interventions, Portland: Mercy Corps,
pg. 10
12
Oxfam (2014) Promoting Sustainable Livelihoods for Women & Vulnerable Groups in Chiradzulu district:
Project Effectiveness Review, Malawi: Oxfam GB, pg. 4
13
Ibid. Pg 4