You are here:

Who develops a Theory of Change (ToC)?

A ToC is best developed together with a group of stakeholder representatives who have diverse skills and perspectives (for example, technical knowledge and lived experience).

The aim of collaborating on the ToC is to capture all of the essential elements necessary to understand how the project/program's activity will achieve its goals. People should have knowledge of the topic and the setting where the project/program will be implemented. Doing this will better ensure the ToC outlines any interim steps (different activity at different times, different outputs, and different intended outcomes) that are necessary before longer-term outcomes and goals can be achieved. Information should be expressed in the ToC in a way that is useful and clear to the program stakeholders.

Stakeholders hold expert knowledge about the proposed program environment and problem context. This first step is vital as it ensures all stakeholders are on the same page with a shared understanding from the outset as to what the problem is which sets up the quality and accuracy of all other ToC development aspects.
Those facilitating discussions on the development of the ToC should first ask stakeholders;
- What is the environment the stakeholders are in?
- What problem are stakeholders trying to address?
- Is there agreement on what the problem is or do stakeholders need more information and opportunity for discussion to come to an agreement?
A comprehensive solution design first requires a comprehensive and stakeholder agreed articulation of the aim/goal first. The ToC Aim should directly link to overarching stakeholder area interests (eg. individual stakeholder strategy and the collective strategy. Having collaborative agreement and stakeholder connection to the Aim/Goal will better ensure project/program activity is discussed in much greater nuance to understand how the overall solution will be implemented.
Those facilitating discussions on the development of the ToC’s aim/goal should ask stakeholders:
- What is the aim or goal of what stakeholders want to achieve through the project/program?
- Is the aim/goal an agreed end solution for the problem?
- What value does the aim/goal offer different stakeholders?
Those facilitating discussions on the development of the ToC’s activity/intervention components should ask stakeholders:
- What are the activities/interventions that are needed to achieve stakeholder goals?
- In what order do activities need to occur to achieve the aim/goals?
- How are activities connected and how do they contribute to achieving the aim?
- Are there activities which are dependent or independent from other activities?
- Are there activities which may be needed but you aren’t sure what they are or if and when they will be needed?
Those facilitating discussions for identification of inputs and outputs in the ToC should ask stakeholders:
- What resources (human, intangible or operational) will be needed to undertake the activity/interventions?
- What will be the direct products/deliverables from your activity/interventions?
- How will outputs come together to deliver on the outcomes and eventual aim/goals of the project/program?
The rationale that is established should be supported with evidence where it is available; for example research data or lived experience. The rationale are the conditions which will underpin ToC to explain how inputs and outputs from an activity will lead to the outcomes and eventual goals being achieved.
The assumptions are the context and assumed rules for the rationale, for example if we know a=b and b=c then a must = c.
Those facilitating discussion for the identification of a ToC rationale should ask stakeholders:
- How do you think the activity will connect up to deliver the change and outcomes sought?
- Will the activity support the change and outcomes sought?
- How will the activity lead to short term outcomes and in turn how will short term outcomes lead to mid and long term change and outcomes?
- Are there external influences that are likely to affect the project/program?
- Are there internal influences that are likely to affect the project/program?
- What is the theoretical understanding of the problem and the solution?
- Are there delivery timeframes factors that will influence the project?
- Are there other requirements that should be identified and considered in how they may influence the project/program reaching its goals?
- Are you confident all the theory and evidence has been considered in the rationale?
In some circumstances the ToC rationale and assumptions related to a project/programs's activity, outcomes and goals are less certain and/or agreed upon by stakeholders (for example, you and the stakeholders don't know whether the proposed solution is feasible). In these cases the emphasis of the ToC and subsequent evaluation may be less focused on outcomes change monitoring and more interested in evaluating the ‘system/environment’ in which the project/program is being implemented (process evaluation).
Implementation-focused evaluation can uncover the evidence required to better define the rationale and assumption aspects of the ToC. For instance a pilot project and evaluation might focus on understanding the process of implementation to provide evidence to stakeholders to support a shared understanding, articulation and agreement on the problem, agreement on the co-designed solution, and then collaboration to understand the rationale for the subsequent activity needed to connect up short, mid and long-term outcomes with the aim/goals that the stakeholders seek to realise.
To measure if your ToC is working requires you to know if outcomes are being reached as originally predicted. The only way to know this is to monitor them for evidence of change, and this requires stakeholders to identify indicators/metrics which they agree demonstrate that an activity is (or is not) leading to the change sought.
These indicators may be ‘observable’ or ‘unobservable’. Observable indicators are those we can build into the ToC and control for (for example, demography, observed behaviour and measured attitudes). Unobservable indicators may influence the outcome, yet are not known about or can’t be measured (for example, unmeasured attitudes, unobserved behaviours or undisclosed attitudes).
Those facilitating discussions for the identification of ToC indicators or metrics should ask stakeholders:
- What indicators (observable or unobservable) would demonstrate that change is occurring towards (or away from) the outcomes sought?
- Can the indicators be gathered as some sort of evidence or data (qualitative or quantitative)?
- How and who will collect such evidence?
- At what point (threshold) in the evidence can it be concluded/agreed that the intended change (outcome) has been achieved?
- At what point can an activity stop or start based on indicator evidence?
- When should outcome indicator data for all outcomes be conducted, completed (short, mid and long- term) or shifted between indicators at different stages of the project/program?
- Are there agreed time estimates for how long it will take for activity/interventions to produce the desired effects/impacts and what happens if times are shorter or longer than predicted?

An example of a simple ToC

An example of a detailed ToC

Additional resources

Australian Institute of Family Studies, Australian Government - What is theory of change?

Julian King - Program Theory GPT

Transforming Access and Student Outcomes in Higher Education (TASO) - Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (MEF)

Intelligence and Insights

Intelligence and Insights

Who develops a Theory of Change (ToC)?

Additional resources