There are challenges in presenting who has changed in an outcome as well as distinguishing separate outcomes. Is the distinction by actor, place, or time? To what extent is the change one or separately isolated cases? To what extent is it widespread or systemic? Change can be fluid and complicate the delineation of outcomes. Moreover, who is counting? Is it the social actor, the evaluator (harvester), or the harvest users? We present the STOP Spillover program developing one-health capacity in seven countries to prepare for and manage viral zoonosis spillover between humans and animals. The program is using outcome harvesting for internal evaluation of progress, lessons, and adaptive management. We observe that it makes sense to use stories of outcomes based on actor types and level or intensity of change. The approach can capture program complexity and impact but requires consideration of context and consensus between harvesters and harvest users.
