Implications of the Theory of Change in Program Evaluation

In program evaluation, the Theory of Change (ToC) emerges as one of the indispensable tools for comprehending the intricate relationships between actions and outcomes. This theory, rooted in the conviction that an initiative’s success hinges on a clearly defined causal pathway, serves as a comprehensive framework that sheds light on the often complex journey from interventions to desired results (Guerzovich et al. in How do we shape and navigate pathways to social accountability scale? Introducing a middle-level theory of change, 2022). At its essence, ToC transcends the confines of a mere theoretical construct, assuming the role of a practical guide employed by organizations and stakeholders to demystify the “how” and “why” behind the transformative potential of their actions (Stein and Valters in Understanding theory of change in international development. The Asia Foundation and the Justice and Security Research Programme at the London School of Economics and Political Science, 2012). De Silva et al. (Trials 15:1–13, 2014) aptly characterize ToC as an elucidation of “how and why an initiative works.” It transcends mere speculation, offering a construct open to empirical testing, with rigorous measurement of indicators at each step along the hypothesized causal pathway to impact.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Buy Now

eBook EUR 96.29 Price includes VAT (France)

Hardcover Book EUR 126.59 Price includes VAT (France)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Notes

Functional literacy refers to the ability to read, write, and comprehend written material in a way that enables individuals to effectively function in their daily lives. It goes beyond basic reading and writing skills, emphasizing practical applications such as understanding and using written information for tasks like communication, problem-solving, and decision-making in various contexts, including work, family, and community life. In functional literacy, the focus is on practical literacy skills that empower individuals to actively participate in society and achieve their goals.

A cognitive tendency that describes the human inclination to seek, interpret, and remember information that confirms one’s existing beliefs or hypotheses. It leads individuals to favor information that supports their preconceptions while dismissing or ignoring evidence that contradicts their established views. This bias can influence decision-making, leading people to perceive information selectively and reinforce their existing opinions or beliefs, potentially hindering a more objective and comprehensive understanding of a situation or topic.

References

• Allen, W., Cruz, J., & Warburton, B. (2017). How decision support systems can benefit from a theory of change approach. Environmental Management,59, 956–965. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Annie, E. (2004). Theory of change: A practical tool for action, results and learning. Casey Foundation, 10–11. Google Scholar
• Banerji, R., & Chavan, M. (2020). A twenty-year partnership of practice and research: The Nobel laureates and Pratham in India. World Development,127, 104788. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Bauman, A. E., Sallis, J. F., Dzewaltowski, D. A., & Owen, N. (2002). Toward a better understanding of the influences on physical activity: The role of determinants, correlates, causal variables, mediators, moderators, and confounders. American Journal of Preventive Medicine,23(2), 5–14. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Berglund, A., & Leifer, L. (2017). Beyond design thinking-whose perspective is driving the people-centric approach to change. In DS 88: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education (E&PDE17), Building Community: Design Education for a Sustainable Future, Oslo, Norway, September 7 & 8, 2017 (pp. 613–618). Google Scholar
• Berik, G. (2020). Measuring what matters and guiding policy: An evaluation of the Genuine Progress Indicator. International Labour Review,159(1), 71–94. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Bovaird, T. (2014). Attributing outcomes to social policy interventions—‘Gold standard’ or ‘fool’s gold’ in public policy and management? Social Policy & Administration,48(1), 1–23. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Breuer, E., De Silva, M. J., Shidaye, R., Petersen, I., Nakku, J., Jordans, M. J., Fekadu, A., & Lund, C. (2016). Planning and evaluating mental health services in low- and middle-income countries using theory of change. The British Journal of Psychiatry,208(s56), s55–s62. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Breuer, E., Lee, L., De Silva, M., & Lund, C. (2015). Using theory of change to design and evaluate public health interventions: A systematic review. Implementation Science,11, 1–17. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Chang, J. Y., Jiang, J. J., Klein, G., & Wang, E. T. (2019). Enterprise system programs: Goal setting and cooperation in the integration team. Information & Management,56(6), 103137. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Chen, H. T., Pan, H. L. W., Morosanu, L., & Turner, N. (2018). Using logic models and the action model/change model schema in planning the learning community program: A comparative case study. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation,33(1), 49–68. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Cochi, S. L., Hegg, L., Kaur, A., Pandak, C., & Jafari, H. (2016). The global polio eradication initiative: Progress, lessons learned, and polio legacy transition planning. Health Affairs,35(2), 277–283. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Connell, J. P., & Kubisch, A. C. (1998). Applying a theory of change approach to the evaluation of comprehensive community initiatives: Progress, prospects, and problems. New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives,2(15–44), 1–16. Google Scholar
• Davies, R. (2004). Scale, complexity and the representation of theories of change. Evaluation,10(1), 101–121. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Davies, R. (2018). Representing theories of change: Technical challenges with evaluation consequences. Journal of Development Effectiveness,10(4), 438–461. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• De Silva, M. J., Breuer, E., Lee, L., Asher, L., Chowdhary, N., Lund, C., & Patel, V. (2014). Theory of change: A theory-driven approach to enhance the Medical Research Council’s framework for complex interventions. Trials,15(1), 1–13. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Dhillon, L., & Vaca, S. (2018). Refining theories of change. Evaluation,14(30), 64–87. Google Scholar
• Ebenso, B., Manzano, A., Uzochukwu, B., Etiaba, E., Huss, R., Ensor, T., Newell, J., Onwujekwe, O., Ezumah, N., Hicks, J., & Mirzoev, T. (2019). Dealing with context in logic model development: Reflections from a realist evaluation of a community health worker programme in Nigeria. Evaluation and Program Planning,73, 97–110. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Funnell, S. C., & Rogers, P. J. (2011). Purposeful program theory: Effective use of theories of change and logic models. Wiley. Google Scholar
• Guerzovich, F., Aston, T., Levy, B., Chies Schommer, P., Haines, R., Cant, S., & Faria Zimmer Santos, G. (2022). How do we shape and navigate pathways to social accountability scale? Introducing a middle-level theory of change. Google Scholar
• Jackson, E. T. (2013). Interrogating the theory of change: Evaluating impact investing where it matters most. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment,3(2), 95–110. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Johnson, G. E., Wright, F. C., & Foster, K. (2018). The impact of rural outreach programs on medical students’ future rural intentions and working locations: A systematic review. BMC Medical Education,18, 1–19. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2019). Critical participatory action research. In Action learning and action research: Genres and approaches (pp. 179–192). Emerald Publishing Limited. Google Scholar
• Lam, S. (2020). Toward learning from change pathways: Reviewing theory of change and its discontents. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation,35(2), 188–203. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Lawson, H. A., Claiborne, N., Hardiman, E., Austin, S., & Surko, M. (2007). Deriving theories of change from successful community development partnerships for youths: Implications for school improvement. American Journal of Education,114(1), 1–40. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Lyon, K., & DeSantis, J. (2010). Planning, implementing, and evaluating training projects for public child welfare agency supervisors: The application of logic models and theory of change. Journal of Child and Youth Care Work,23, 147–167. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Margules, C., Boedhihartono, A. K., Langston, J. D., Riggs, R. A., Sari, D. A., Sarkar, S., Sayer, J. A., Supriatna, J., & Winarni, N. L. (2020). Transdisciplinary science for improved conservation outcomes. Environmental Conservation,47(4), 224–233. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Maru, Y. T., Sparrow, A., Butler, J. R., Banerjee, O., Ison, R., Hall, A., & Carberry, P. (2018). Towards appropriate mainstreaming of “theory of change” approaches into agricultural research for development: Challenges and opportunities. Agricultural Systems,165, 344–353. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Narot, P., Trantrirat, S., Arirattana, W., Yuenyoung, C., Hiengrat, C., & Trisirirat, J. (2012). Local learning enrichment network: Khon Kaen province. Thailand Research Fund. Google Scholar
• Newton, X. A., Poon, R. C., Nunes, N. L., & Stone, E. M. (2013). Research on teacher education programs: Logic model approach. Evaluation and Program Planning,36(1), 88–96. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Nielsen, K., & Randall, R. (2013). Opening the black box: Presenting a model for evaluating organizational-level interventions. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,22(5), 601–617. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Pierce, S., Gould, D., & Camiré, M. (2017). Definition and model of life skills transfer. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology,10(1), 186–211. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Reinholz, D. L., & Andrews, T. C. (2020). Change theory and theory of change: What’s the difference anyway? International Journal of STEM Education,7(1), 1–12. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Roberton, T., & Sawadogo-Lewis, T. (2022). Building coherent monitoring and evaluation plans with the evaluation planning tool for global health. Global Health Action,15(sup1), 2067396. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Rogers, P. J., & Weiss, C. H. (2007). Theory-based evaluation: Reflections ten years on: Theory-based evaluation: Past, present, and future. New Directions for Evaluation,2007(114), 63–81. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Stein, D., & Valters, C. (2012). Understanding theory of change in international development: A review of existing knowledge. Paper prepared for The Asia Foundation and the Justice and Security Research Programme at the London School of Economics and Political Science. Google Scholar
• Stem, C., Margoluis, R., Salafsky, N., & Brown, M. (2005). Monitoring and evaluation in conservation: A review of trends and approaches. Conservation Biology,19(2), 295–309. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Stufflebeam, D. L. (1998). Conflicts between standards-based and postmodernist evaluations: Toward rapprochement. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education,12, 287–296. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Taplin, D. H., Clark, H., Collins, E., & Colby, D. C. (2013). Theory of change. Technical papers: A series of papers to support development of theories of change based on practice in the field. ActKnowledge, New York, NY. Google Scholar
• The Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2022). Developing a theory of change: Practical guidance (Part I). Retrieved from https://assets.aecf.org/m/resourcedoc/aecf-theoryofchange-guidance-2022.pdf
• Thomson, M., Kentikelenis, A., & Stubbs, T. (2017). Structural adjustment programmes adversely affect vulnerable populations: A systematic-narrative review of their effect on child and maternal health. Public Health Reviews,38, 1–18. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Thornton, P. K., Schuetz, T., Förch, W., Cramer, L., Abreu, D., Vermeulen, S., & Campbell, B. M. (2017). Responding to global change: A theory of change approach to making agricultural research for development outcome-based. Agricultural Systems,152, 145–153. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Vogel, I. (2012). Review of the use of ‘theory of change’ in international development. UK Department of International Development. Retrieved September 10, 2021 from https://www.theoryofchange.org/pdf/DFID_ToC_Review_VogelV7.pdf
• Yang, Z., Ahmad, S., Bernardi, A., Shang, W. L., Xuan, J., & Xu, B. (2023). Evaluating alternative low carbon fuel technologies using a stakeholder participation-based q-rung orthopair linguistic multi-criteria framework. Applied Energy,332, 120492. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Zhang-Zhang, Y., Rohlfer, S., & Varma, A. (2022). Strategic people management in contemporary highly dynamic VUCA contexts: A knowledge worker perspective. Journal of Business Research,144, 587–598. ArticleGoogle Scholar

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. College of Local Administration, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand Narong Kiettikunwong
2. Faculty of Education, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand Pennee Narot

1. Narong Kiettikunwong