Theory of change
The theory of change (ToC) approach first emerged in the USA as early as the mid-1990s with the aim of improving evaluation theory and practice (Stein & Valters, 2012). Theory of change did not only seek to improve evaluation theory and practice but also evolved because of the emphasis placed on outcome and accountability by project and programme funders (James, 2011; Stein & Valters, 2012). This reason placed much attention on the need for a theory of change. As postulated by Weiss (2004), the ToC conceived that a key reason why a complex project fails is that the underlying expectations of the project are poorly articulated (Omonyo, 2015). Varied definitions exist regarding what theory of change stands for in different organizations in the evaluation field (Stein & Valters, 2012). A theory of change is described as a critical thinking process or tool that provides a comprehensive outlook of the early and intermediate changes that are needed to achieve a long-term goal or objective. Taplin and Clark (2012) assert that theory of change is a rigorous and participatory process in planning for long-term goals of a project by stakeholders through the identification of conditions or interventions which are believed will cause the achievement of the project long-term objective. In other descriptions, Rogers (2014) advanced that a theory of change is a set of philosophies describing the expected change, how the process will occur, what makes it happen and what must be done for the intended results to be achieved. This he further acknowledges as the enviable task of project stakeholders. The theory of change model is presented in a graphic form (see Figure 4-2) and outlines the immediate conditions as intended outcome in a casual framework or pathway (Stein &. Valters, 2012; Taplin & Clark, 2012). Theory of change can therefore be explained as assumptions about how direct interventions contribute to achieving project success (Weiss, 1995).
It is believed that the theory of change approach has been adopted in many fields predominantly by the international non-governmental organization for
Figure 4-2 Schematic depiction of a theory of change.
Source: Adapted from Rogers, 2014
evaluation purposes (James, 2011). Stein and Valters (2012) indicate however that the use of the theory of change in the field of community development has become the mainstream owing to the demands of key funders as well as the desire to achieve some level of results by organizations. The purpose of the theory of change to organizations and project funders varies (Taplin, Clark, Collins, & Colby, 2013). Stein and Valters (2012) outline four purposes of a theory of change: Firstly, it is a support in systematic planning which integrates with the log frame to develop the process (pathways) leading to change in the intended outcome for project implementation; secondly, monitoring and evaluation aids in reviewing intended processes and outcomes over a period of time; thirdly, it provides a description which permits organizations to communicate selected changes of processes to partners; and the final purpose is learning which concerns the application of the theory of change as a thinking tool. Taplin et al. (2013) also identify that a theory of change drives communication through outcome pathways and narrative to stakeholders, builds core capacities, clarifies the relationship among stakeholders, strategizes influence on the boundary of stakeholders, plans outcome-based activities (approach to M&E) and clarifies M&E priorities.
Program theory
Program theory of evaluation has grown in use over the past decade. It assesses whether a programme is designed in such a way that it can achieve its intended
Theories of monitoring and evaluation 61 outcomes. The programme theory is a guidance theory in the evaluation of projects as it shows the capacity of the programme to attend to specific problems within projects that need to be reviewed. It further offers guidance on what areas need to be emphasized during the evaluation process (Donaldson, 2001). In this book, programme theory is used because it presents the advantage of offering information that could lead to additional explanations regarding the M&.E tools, employee training, management influence on M&E systems and stakeholder participation in project delivery. Where appropriate, this theory comes in handy to provide solutions and the alternate actions to be carried out to obtain the intended results for projects to be evaluated. Further, it can be used to enhance decision making and expand conceptions of solutions to any project problems (McClintock, 1990). Rossi, Lipsey and Freeman (2003) describe programme theory as consisting of the organizational plan which deals with how to gather, configure and deploy resources and how to organize programme activities so that the intended service system is developed and maintained.
The theory also deals with the service utilization plan which looks at how the intended target population receives the intended amount of the intended intervention through interaction with the programme service delivery system. Finally, it looks at how the intended intervention for the specified target population brings about the desired social benefit impacts. Ditto (2004) also identifies the advantages of the theory-based framework to M&E to include being able to attribute project outcomes to specific projects or activities and identify the unanticipated and undesired programme or project consequences. Theory-based evaluations enable the evaluator to tell why and how the programme is working (Weiss, 2004). However, this theory is limiting in its approaches as it requires excessive reliance on a collection of data to guide in the evaluation process and this may be costly for projects that are working under tight budgetary allocations. The theory is also limited since it only overemphasizes the impact of the project to the intended people but does not state anything to do with the project executors, whether they have the capacity and ability to collect the data intended for the evaluation.