• It is important to view causal loop maps as historical and not predictive.
• The maps can be complicated and difficult to digest for those not involved in creating them, prompting some grantmakers to create simplified versions for sharing. 
• Some grantmakers use the map to make meaning of the system. Others use the map as a way to engage grantees, with the process rather than the map itself as central to developing grantee capacity for systems thinking. With participatory approaches, it is important for stakeholders to recognize that they have shared interests (although they may have different goals), consider how their actions affect each other, and manage power dynamics among participants. In these approaches, grantmakers have also paired this map as the first step in developmental evaluation and systemic action learning to develop collective understanding of the system.
• It is easy to misinterpret causal loop maps because they usually do not show the magnitude of effect on variables or patterns of behavior over time. It’s important to be cautious about drawing conclusions regarding the net impact of loops. To use the example above, if time spent on fundraising dropped in half and bipartisan relationships increased by a tenth, the net impact would still be insufficient bipartisanship. Without the magnitudes, one could incorrectly assume they cancel each other out.
• If greater precision about the net impact of loops is desired, grantmakers could consider using Systems Mapping and System Dynamics Modeling instead of Causal Loop Mapping.

It is possible to create a causal loop map without any advanced technology, but technology such as the online cloud-based mapping platform, Kumu, allows for advanced mapping capabilities, sharing and multi-user mapping manipulation, as well as iterative use of the maps.