THEORY OF CHANGE VS. LOGICAL FRAMEWORK ELDTRAINING THEORY OF CHANGE VS. LOGICAL FRAMEWORK

Theory of Change

Theory of Change Series of cause and effect relationships Systematic way of identifying steps needed to achieve a outcomes Helps understand how program interventions contribute to program goals Specifies components of the program and their relationship to each other Visually conveys beliefs about the programs strategy / makes assumptions explicit Builds a commonly understood vision of long-term goals, how they will be reached, and how to measure progress along the way Provides a unifying framework for strategic decision-making, communicating, and reporting

Theory of Change Vs. Logical Framework Debate in the international development community about the best way to describe how programs lead to results. One approach has been to use a Logical Framework, which most donors now require. Another approach is to create a Theory of Change. There is no official definition of a Theory of Change or how it differs from a Logical Framework. Both have the same general purpose – to describe how your program will lead to results, and to help you think critically about this. (Some people) even say a Theory of Change is essentially the same thing as a Logical Framework, it’s just that over time people have forgotten how to do Logical Frameworks properly.

Theory of Change Vs. Logical Framework In practice there are some differences in how they are used.  At the simplest level, a Theory of Change shows the big, messy “real world” picture, with all the possible pathways leading to change, and why you think they lead to change (do you have evidence, or is it an assumption?) There is often a trade-off between the explanatory and persuasive aspects of the underlying logic. A Logical Framework is like zooming in on the specific pathway that your program deals with and creating a neat, orderly structure for it. This makes it easier for you and the donor to monitor program implementation.

Theory of Change in Practice Gives the big picture, including issues related to the environment or context that you can’t control. Shows all the different pathways that might lead to change, even if those pathways are not related to your program. Describes how and why you think change happens. Could be used to complete the sentence “if we do X  then Y will change because…”. Is presented as a diagram with narrative text. The diagram is flexible and doesn’t have a particular format – it could include cyclical processes, feedback loops, one box could lead to multiple other boxes, different shapes could be used, etc. Describes why you think one box will lead to another box (e.g. if you think increased knowledge will lead to behaviour change, is that an assumption or do you have evidence to show it is the case?). Is mainly used as a tool for program design and evaluation.

Theory of Change Vs. Logical Framework

Context/ Situational Analysis Clarify the Program Goal Define program intervention Map the Causal Pathway Identify SMART indicators Explicate assumptions Convert to logical framework

Logical Framework in Practice Gives a detailed description of the program showing how the program activities will lead to the immediate outputs, and how these will lead to the outcomes and goal (the terminology used varies by organisation). Could be used to complete the sentence “we plan to do X  which will give Y result”. Is normally shown as a matrix, called a Log Frame. It can also be shown as a flow chart, which is sometimes called a logic model. Is linear, which means that all activities lead to outputs which lead to outcomes and the goal – there are no cyclical processes or feedback loops. Includes space for risks and assumptions, although these are usually only basic. Doesn’t include evidence for why you think one thing will lead to another. Is mainly used as a tool for monitoring.

NARRATIVE SUMMARY INDICATORS MOV ASSUMPTIONS GOAL / IMPACT Improved health status of Internally Displaced People at Camp A Number of cases of waterborne diseases reduced by 50% Camp health post reports PURPOSE / OUTCOME Immediate improvement of living conditions of 5000 Internally Displaced People in Camp A Within 2 weeks, all IDPs have access to: – sufficient safe water – hygienic latrines – safe accommodation Observation report Community meeting report No unanticipated outbreaks / epidemics Local government continues to provide sufficient nutrition / medical care OUTPUTS 1. Increased availability and accessibility of safe water for IDPs 2. Increased availability and accessibility of safe latrines 3. Occupancy of temporary shelters does not exceed 10 people per tent 4. IDPs aware of how to reduce risk of disease 1.1 Each IDP has access to 3L of safe water per day within 7 days 1.2 5 x communal water tanks with capacity 2000L are functional within 1st week 2.1 20 x functioning temporary latrines operational within 10 days 3.1 100 x tents distributed to 100 hh within first week 3.2 maximum occupancy of 90% of tents is 10 persons 4.1 1000 IDPs aware of how to reduce health risks from waterborne diseases, sanitary practices and overcrowding 1. Distribution reports 2. Observation 3. Observation / progress reports 4. FGD / community meeting Number of IDPs does not significantly increase IDPs maintain hygienic standards of latrines ACTIVITIES 1.1 Distributing 500m3 water (water truck) 1.2 Borehole water in one point 1.3 Set up communal water tanks 1.4 Distribute buckets (capacity 20 lt.) 2.1 Constructing temporary latrines 3.1 Distributing tents 3.2 Advocacy and coordination with local government 4.1 Conducting hygiene programme for IDPs Inputs Total Cost: GBP 18,650 Direct Cost: 14,650 Water Trucking – 3600 Borehole Water – 550 Purchase / installing 5 water tanks – 200 Purchase / distribution 1000 water buckets capacity 20L – 2,500 Constructing 20 temporary latrines – 2,500 Conducting hygiene promotion – 300 Providing and distributing 100 tents – 5000 Indirect Cost: GBP 4000 (Transport, staffing, indirect operational costs) Local government gives full access to the camp

Theory of Change: the 7 Steps Context/ Situational Analysis Clarify the Program Goal Define program intervention Map the Causal Pathway Identify SMART indicators Explicate assumptions Convert to logical framework Situation analysis – Specifying the context Clarifying the program goal Designing the program Mapping the causal pathway Designing SMART indicators Making assumptions explicit Converting to Logical Framework