Theory of Change: what’s it all about? · Concern Universal developing a Theory of Change....

The newsletter of

No. 51 May 2012

ContentsTheory of Change: what’s it all about?. . .1

Developing an organisational Theory ofChange: Concern Universal’s experience 3

The importance of process: developing aTheory of Change for a DFID-fundedprogramme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

Evolutionary acceleration: an alternativetheory of change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Prove it, improve it, innovate it: what willyou get when you work with Theory ofChange in your programme? . . . . . . . . . .7

In this issue:

This issue of ONTRAC looks at ‘Theory ofChange’: another ‘new’ idea that hasbecome increasingly popular in thedevelopment sector in recent years.Maureen Flynn first provides an overview ofTheories of Change – what they are; howand why they were developed; how theyrelate to other methods of assessing impact;and how they can support effectivedevelopment. The articles that follow thenaddress experiences and applications ofTheories of Change across differing contexts.

James Treasure-Evans outlines thedevelopment of Concern Universal’s Theoryof Change, and the challenges and benefitsthat they found during the process. StephenFraser, writing about the experiences of theSAVI programme in Nigeria, emphasises howdeveloping a Theory of Change can helpprogrammes to retain a focus on processes.

Duncan Green provides an alternativeapproach to developing a theory of socialchange, describing how an Oxfamprogramme in Tanzania took on anevolutionary acceleration approach to itswork on accountability. Finally, Isabel Vogelreports on the interesting results of a DFID-commissioned review of people’sexperience with Theory of Change.

Theory of Change: what’s it all about?

viewpoint

The development sector is buzzing withanother ‘new’ idea: Theory of Change.Proponents believe that Theories ofChange will reform the way thatorganisations plan for and assess theirdevelopment efforts. Increasing pressurefrom organisations’ boards and fundersto articulate long-term impact hasencouraged many to look for new andbetter ways to represent what they do.Many funders, organisationaldevelopment providers and consultantsare using Theory of Change to help NGOsfocus more directly on long-term changerather than project-focussed outputs andoutcomes, and to help them to directtheir energies more clearly. The result isa rush of organisations eager to jump onthe Theory of Change bandwagon.Requests for training and support on thishave never been greater.

Theories of Change have much torecommend them. If the process isdeveloped well, with full stakeholderengagement, they have the potential toensure shared planning andunderstanding of organisation and

programme goals; a rigorous testing ofassumptions made when planning andimplementing development interventions;improved accountability and learning;and the provision of a high levelcommunication and marketing tool.

However, if they are developed at headoffice level in response to a donorrequirement (as is increasingly the case),they risk being an expensive waste oftime and resources. Developing a Theoryof Change is not a quick fix; rather it is along-term change process that requiressubstantial investment in terms of stafftime, commitment and resources. Theexamples from Concern Universal andSAVI contained in this issue demonstratethis well. Therefore ensuring institutionalbuy-in at all levels is essential toensuring success.

So, when and why did Theories ofChange emerge? What exactly are they?How do they complement otherprocesses for planning and assessingimpact? And, not least, how can they beused to ensure more effectivedevelopment?

© Erik

Cleves Kristens

en 200

6

www.intrac.org

10641_Ontrac51_option3.qxp:Ontrac43 16/05/2012 16:39

www.intrac.org2

When and why were they developed?

Although people have long exploredtheories of social change, the concept of‘Theory of Change’ first emerged in themid-1990s in response to the challengeof assessing the impact of complex socialdevelopment programmes. Carol Weiss –author of the first publication on Theory ofChange – argued that the impact of theseprogrammes was difficult to assessbecause the assumptions that inspiredthem were poorly articulated andstakeholders were unclear about how thechange process would unfold.Consequently little attention was paid tothe sequence of changes necessary for alonger term goal to be reached. This lackof clarity not only made the task ofevaluating a complex initiativechallenging; it also reduced the likelihoodthat all of the important factors related tothe long-term goal would be addressed.Weiss popularised the term ‘Theory ofChange’ as a way to describe the set ofassumptions that explain both the stepsthat lead to the long-term goal and theconnections between programmeactivities and outcomes that occur ateach step of the way.

What are they?

Theories of Change can be set atorganisational levels, programme levelsand even project levels. Although thereare endless variations in terms of styleand content, the basic componentsinclude a big picture analysis of howchange happens in relation to specificthematic area; an articulation of anorganisation or programme pathway inrelation to this; and an impactassessment framework which isdesigned to test both the pathway andthe assumptions made about howchange happens. They are oftenillustrated in diagrammatic form,accompanied by some explanatory notes.

How do they complement otherprocesses for planning and assessingthe impact of organisational efforts?

There is no one clear answer to thisquestion because different organisations

use the process in different ways.Typically, Theories of Change:

• show a causal pathway by specifyingwhat is needed for goals to beachieved

• require the articulation of underlyingassumptions which can be tested andmeasured

• change the way organisations thinkabout implementation strategies, byencouraging them to focus not somuch on what is being done, but onwhat needs to be changed.

How can they support more effectivedevelopment?

There is so much potential with Theory ofChange. If developed and usedeffectively, it can be used:

• as a framework to check progresstowards change (to complementproject logic) and to stay on course

• to test the weak links in the changepathway (right people? rightstrategies? right outcomes?)

• to document lessons learnt aboutwhat really changes in relation to ourefforts

• to keep the process ofimplementation, and impactassessment transparent, so everyoneknows what changing and how

• to report more effectively to funders,policymakers and boards.

The time is ripe for organisations toinvest time and energy in exploring whatis involved in developing a Theory ofChange; and analysing how it mightbenefit their planning and impactassessment processes. The process is ata cusp – we need to ensure that thevalue of Theories of Change is not erodedby fashionable reductionism.

Maureen O’FlynnINTRAC Associate

[email protected]

INTRAC trainingNEW COURSE!

Theory of Change

8-10 October 2012

Donors are increasingly requiringgrantees to provide a Theory ofChange to accompany theirproposals. Those organisations whohave already developed a Theory ofChange have found that the processand the product can provide greaterclarity for communication, planningand M&E; enhance partnerrelationships and supportorganisational development.

This course gives participants a solidunderstanding of what Theories ofChange are; how they complementother planning processes; and howthey can be applied to organisationsand to programmes. The course willbuild participants’ skills in developinga Theory of Change for their ownorganisation or programme, andallows them to experiment withdeveloping elements of a Theory ofChange.

Objectives of the course

After the course, participants will:

• be able to describe what Theoriesof Change involve and include andthe rationale for using them

• be able to identify how and whenthey should be developed andhow they inform and complementother planning and M&E tools

• have increased confidence inworking through the steps andprocesses involved in developingTheories of Change

• have explored ways to promote anddevelop robust Theories of Changewithin their own organisation andhave developed an action plan forapplying the learning.

Visit www.intrac.org/pages/en/

training.html for more information.


www.intrac.org 3

As management guru Peter Drucker oncestated, the challenge of strategic levelchange is to combine ‘doing things well’(greater efficiency) with ‘doing the rightthings’ (increased effectiveness).Developing a Theory of Change has beenone part of our wider ongoing journey tobetter understand what we do and whywe do it.

There were three basic drivers behindConcern Universal developing a Theoryof Change. Firstly, some of our countryprogrammes were already developingcountry level theories and there was aninternal push to have an organisationallevel Theory of Change. Secondly, ourmain funding partners had begun askingus to explain our Theory of Change.Finally, we saw developing a Theory ofChange as a useful tool for a mid-termreview of our organisational strategy.

Developing our Theory of Change

It took us seven months to develop ourTheory of Change. Making the most of astrategy review meeting attended by stafffrom across Concern Universal, we settime aside for an introductory Theory of

Change workshop. The workshop soughtbuy-in and understanding for the processand allowed us to explore what a Theoryof Change is and how it can be used.

During the workshop we formed a workinggroup to lead the process, comprising UKand in-country staff. Their first task was todevelop a paper on poverty andvulnerability, helping us to think throughthe processes of social change.

The paper explored the underlying causesof poverty and vulnerability; how does(social) change happen, how does ourwork promote change, and how can weincorporate change into programmeplanning? The poverty paper andorganisational strategy formed the basisof our discussions throughout the processof developing our Theory of Change.

The Theory of Change went throughseveral iterations as drafts werecommented on by colleagues across theorganisation. It was based on theprinciples of our organisational strategy,starting with the main challenges facingpeople living in poverty and finishingwith our vision – a world where justice,

Developing an organisational Theory of Change: ConcernUniversal’s experience

dignity and respect prevails for all. Butwhere the Theory of Change differs fromour strategy is that it focuses on howour vision can be attained; in otherwords the pathway to change.

Once we had a Theory of Change it tookmuch longer than expected to decide onits graphical representation. The designprocess brought up a number offundamental issues and we almost endedup going back to the drawing board.While putting the final design in place wewrote up brief explanatory notes.

We had originally envisaged that thebackground paper on poverty would beenough of a guide to the paper butactually the explanatory notes haveproved the more useful tool and nowform an integral part of the Theory ofChange.

Challenges

The greatest challenge that we facedas we developed the Theory of Changewas securing the commitment ofcolleagues to the process. This waspartly because colleagues were busy


www.intrac.org4

with country level priorities, andbecause not everyone within theorganisation was convinced that aTheory of Change would add anythingthat wasn’t already outlined in ourorganisational strategy. Somequestioned the value of the Theory ofChange as a strategic planning tool.

Now that we have the Theory of Changeeveryone can see how it relates to theirwork. However, we also recognise that thefull benefits of the approach – as aplanning tool and leading to improvementsin project design – will only be fullyachieved when we develop country andproject level Theories of Change.

Benefits

We believe we will be able to use theTheory of Change in many ways: as ameans to explain to donors what we doand how we learn; as a reference pointby in-country teams to develop countryprogramme (or project) Theories ofChange; as an aide memoire in projectplanning; and in setting more specificterms of reference for impactassessments.

Since developing the organisationalTheory of Change two countryprogrammes have already developedcountry level Theories of Change andhave begun to use the Theory of Changetool in project planning.

James Treasure-EvansConcern Universal

[email protected]

Concern Universal is an internationaldevelopment organisation tacklingpoverty from the grassroots.

We create opportunities for peoplearound the world to improve their livesand shape their own futures. By buildingskills and connecting people at all levelsin society, we help communities deliverpractical solutions with long-termimpact.

www.concern-universal.org/theory

SAVI is a six-year programme providingtechnical support to strengthen relationsbetween citizens and government inNigeria through supporting civil society,the media and Houses of Assembly inselected states. Like many DFID-fundedprogrammes, it has recently come underincreased pressure to show results.

However, with the growing pressure forresults there is a danger that theprocesses by which they are achievedget overlooked. SAVI’s experiencedemonstrates that developing a Theoryof Change can help programmes toretain a focus on processes.

When the programme began in 2008 thebig question then was how we weregoing to get results. We started bydeveloping the programme logframe asa tool to help us plan, coordinate,monitor and report activities and resultsfrom a process perspective. Indicatorsand baselines were established basedon our analysis of what was most likelyto drive change in each state: our initialTheory of Change. Since we didn’t knowfor sure what would and wouldn’t work,we aimed to use our logframe to trackthe process to inform the developmentof this Theory.

Results for us were thus framed both interms of immediate, tangible outcomesand impacts, for example changes ingovernment policy; but also longer-termsystemic changes, for example strongerplatforms for collective action, whichmeasure the extent of local ownership,sustainability and replicability of thoseprocesses that worked.

However, with the increased pressureDFID is under to communicate results,SAVI’s logframe has been graduallyreduced to a series of indicators andnumbers emphasising short-term resultsand struggles to tell the story of howthey were achieved or what theimplications are for their sustainability

and replicability. Consequently, SAVI hashad to develop a second programmeplanning framework based on its Theoryof Change, separate from but linked tothe logframe, which focuses on theprocesses for achieving sustainable,long-term results.

How we went about it

SAVI staff try to practice what theypreach: empowerment andaccountability through collectiveresponsibility. SAVI’s current Theory ofChange is the product of more thanthree years of regular meetings of all ourstate teams, guided and supported by acentral team of advisers and specialists.

SAVI’s Theory of Change is not static butever evolving. It was nearly a year intothe programme before it really tookshape. By pooling the previousexperience of all the staff; looking attheoretical frameworks used by othersimilar programmes; combining thesewith contextual analysis of each selectedstate; and finding areas of commonground, we were eventually able toreach consensus on a broad, basicframework that articulated a Theory ofChange that was to everyone’ssatisfaction.

With each annual review, both Theoryand framework have been revisited,challenged and further improved. And asthe logframe has become increasinglyless accommodating, so the Theory ofChange’s own framework has taken on awhole life and importance of its own.Consequently, it now barely resemblesthe initial basic form that emerged in2009. However, close inspection revealsthat each stage of its development hasprovided a foundation for the next.

The challenges and benefits

Though the benefits clearly outweigh thechallenges, the process of developingSAVI’s Theory of Change has not been

The importance of process: developing a Theory of Change for a DFID-funded programme


www.intrac.org 55

easy. A lot of sweat and tears have goneinto trying to:

• reach consensus among the staff ona form that meets all their needs andexpectations, and helps themtranslate theory into practice

• gain acceptance of the need toadjust strategy, even direction, inresponse to lessons learnt andimprovements with use – many staffare used to following a blueprint, notdeveloping one as they go along

• explain to others why SAVI’sapproach and goalposts seem tokeep shifting

• communicate the Theory of Changein a way that makes it broad enoughto be applicable to a wide range ofsettings, yet tangible enough to bewell understood.

However, over time this has becomeeasier and SAVI’s Theory of Change hasbecome increasingly valued.

• Planned activities are becoming morestrategic and justifiable.

• Monitoring and reporting of activitiesand outcomes is more now efficientand effective.

• Measuring the effectiveness of stepstaken by local partners to strengtheninclusive governance is progressivelybecoming ‘smarter’.

• Communication of SAVI’sachievements is generally improving,strengthening the likelihood ofreplication of bits or whole processesby new and existing SAVI state teamsand other local developmentpractitioners.

The unexpected overarching challengeof having to develop a supplementaryplanning framework separate from thelogframe to support programmemanagement of the processes SAVI ispiloting to develop our Theory ofChange, has been a huge task, thoughnot a regrettable one. It has in factserved to further highlight theimportance of process to the programmeand all its partners.

Dr Stephen FraserDeputy Team Leader (Technical) on behalf of

the entire DFID-SAVI [email protected]

Evolutionaryacceleration: analternative theoryof change

'Theories of Change' are all the rage indevelopment circles, but like many such'fuzzwords', the meaning of the term israther plastic. For some, it means littlemore than an upgraded 'logicalframework' setting out project plans interms of a linear sequence of activities,outputs and intended outcomes againstwhich a project can be monitored,evaluated and judged.

But theories of change offer a muchmore exciting possibility: helping NGOsand other actors chart a course throughthe uncertainties and lack of linearitythat in development (as in life) are morethe rule than the exception. This articleprovides an example from Tanzania,where Oxfam is applying a theory ofchange based on evolutionary theory toits work on accountability, with somepromising results.

Evolutionary acceleration in practice

Chukua Hatua (Take Action) does what itsays on the tin. The programme istesting different approaches through aseries of pilots to learn which can bestact as a catalyst for Tanzanians to claimtheir rights. What’s innovative about thisis that Chukua Hatua explicitly uses amodel of evolutionary acceleration,which is built on evolution’s coreprocess of variation-selection-amplification.1

In the first phase (variation), theprogramme sets lots of different haresrunning, namely:

• Election promises tracking

• Farmer animators

• Active musicians

• Student councils

• Community radio


www.intrac.org6

In addition to the pilots, Oxfam alsosupported local campaigns wherecommunities were already active, mostnotably in Ngorongoro.2

It then selects (or allows naturalselection, as projects multiply or die oftheir own accord) the ‘fittest’ variants.Last September, a year into the project,came the difficult bit – killing off the lesssuccessful experiments.

Working with partners, a couple of otherNGOs, the programme consultants, andKPMG (which manages the programmefor DFID), we came up with criteria onwhich to judge the pilots:

• How much were they spreadingawareness?

• How successful were they inmobilising people to take action?

• How responsive was the government(either local or national)?

Overall, the farm animators came outbest. The musicians were better atawareness raising and mobilisation, butfailed to get a good governmentresponse. We dropped some pilots andmerged others. The student councilapproach was dropped and spun off toanother funder.

The final phase will be amplification:creating an enabling environment for theselected initiatives and promotingsynergies between them, but otherwisestaying out of the way so that new ideasand approaches bubble up from thegrassroots. Think venture capitalism(fund 10 start-up companies, hoping thatone goes big, even if the others flop), butwithout the bottom line.

What didn’t work and why?

• Geography: The active musicianswere not able to work well becausethe communities were too widelydispersed to reach.

• Government obstruction: The

community radio never got off theground because the government didnot issue a licence.

• Informal verses formal power: Thefarmer animators’ work wasunsuccessful in spreading awarenessbeyond the groups that the animatorsbelonged to. This might have beendue to their lack of a ‘formal’ positionin community leadership.

• Attitudes to youth: Students wereable to make demands within theirschools, but were unable to take thisapproach into the community asthere was simply not enough respectfor young people’s viewpoints.

Apart from the shake-out of pilots, anumber of other issues have emerged:

• The programme needs to do more toprepare for negative responsesincluding introducing training innegotiation skills and conflictresolution and linking citizens andpartners to national human rightsdefence organisations.

• In Tanzania, building ‘created spaces’is much harder than helping citizensmake better use of existing ‘invitedspaces’ for consultation andaccountability. The main obstaclehere is often lack of capacity, so thenext phase will continue to work withlocal elected leaders so they aremore likely to support citizens’demands, and become a key ally intaking citizens’ issues upwards tocentral government.

• Although there have been somenotable successes, gender bias inTanzania is very entrenched andwork with women needs to bestrengthened, especially looking atwomen’s leadership, men’s attitudesto women and women’s participationin public spaces.

Importance of power analysis

Perhaps most interesting is the widerimpact on how Oxfam is working inTanzania. The team is getting muchmore expert in understanding who haspower at the local level, and in the nextphase will involve key local players suchas faith leaders, traditional birthattendants and healers, and even thevillage militias.

Last word to programme coordinatorJane Lonsdale:

“I can’t differentiate programming frompower analysis – they go hand in hand.We’re doing something different now,not just rolling out a load of communityscorecards, or public expendituretracking – the usual kind of governancework.

“We’re pushing ourselves to really thinkthrough how change happens inTanzania and try out different things. Thewhole team and partners are nowtalking in terms of power analysis. We’vegot the same language to describe whatchange looks like. Everyone is pickingup trends and patterns – it’s a lot betterthan conventional indicators.”

Duncan GreenSenior strategic adviser, Oxfam GB and

author of the ‘From Poverty to Power’ blogwww.oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/

Notes

1. See www.oxfamblogs.org/fp2p

/?p=5384 for more details.

2. See www.oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/?s=

jane+lonsdale&x=0&y=0 for moredetails.


www.intrac.org 7

Prove it, improve it, innovate it: what will you get when youwork with Theory of Change in your programme?Against the competing pressures of theresults agenda, recognition of thecomplex realities of development workand growing emphasis of working incollaboration with local actors,institutions and local capacities indeveloping countries, some arequestioning whether the Theory ofChange approach can really help.

To shed light on this debate DFIDcommissioned a review of people’sexperience with Theory of Change. DFIDhas been working formally with Theoryof Change as an approach to designingand commissioning programming since2010. The purpose of the review was tolearn from other people how they workwith Theory of Change, identifying areasof consensus, debate and innovation inorder to inform a more consistentapproach within DFID.

Although Theory of Change ismainly seen as an evaluation tool(‘prove it’) and a great tool for

visioning and planning (‘improve it’); many people

highlighted that its real potentiallies in sparking innovation.

I spoke to 40 people from 25development organisations, includingdonor agencies, NGOs and research andtraining organisations. What was reallyinteresting was that so many differentkinds of organisations have found Theoryof Change an accessible, intuitive anduseful approach to engage strategicthinking and learning for programmedevelopment, as well as for evaluation.

The most surprising finding was thatalthough Theory of Change is mainly seenas an evaluation tool (‘prove it’) and a greattool for visioning and planning (‘improve it’); lots of people highlighted that its realpotential lies in sparking innovation.

By encouraging people to explore theirassumptions and worldviews, and focus

on what is happening in the context inan ongoing way, people find they getmore ideas, it inspires new ways ofworking and it encourages them to lookat what is going on around theirprogramme as they implement it. Newopportunities can be spotted andresponded to while there is still time toimprove.

In this way, programmes are able toadapt, innovate and improve theirpotential to achieve meaningful andlasting positive change to support peoplein developing countries.

What creates the sparks?

‘Theory of Change’ as an approach is notnew. Its methodological credentials comefrom a well-established history inevaluation and programme theory, but italso draws on long traditions of informedaction, participation and reflectivepractice for social change.

Most guidelines on Theory of Change saythat you need to ‘make yourassumptions explicit’, but peopleindicated that this is not easy to do inpractice. The blending of both traditionsin the current evolution of Theory ofChange means that in practice, workingwith Theory of Change often prompts adeeper reflective (and self-reflexive)analysis than people expect.

Assumptions are the ‘rules of thumb’ andways of seeing the world that we all useunconsciously to guide what we do.Sometimes, not exploring these meansthat we revert to ‘business as usual’,comfort zones get hard-wired into waysof working, and we can miss clues as towhat could really make the difference inthis context, for these people, today.

Theory of Change encourages us to startwith the context, who we want tosupport and why. It says that differentviews are valuable and it is necessary tobring these out, compare them and nottry to make them all the same.

We need to ask ourselves difficultquestions about the world, and keepusing different ways of looking at it if weare to spot new ideas and opportunitiesand create a strong initiative.

Through comparing different views,Theory of Change unlocks positivecritical thinking about the things thatpeople care deeply about: their work;who they want to benefit; and how andwhy their organisation is going to setabout improving a situation. This deepreflection in a Theory of Change processoften brings a clarity of thinking andinsight, a real boost of energy andmotivation; what people call ‘ahamoments’.

Keeping the ‘aha’ moments going

The most important question that peopleposed was: “The Theory of Changeworkshop was great, but how do youkeep it going?”

The key message was to not to try tointroduce a detailed process from the topdown, but to work with the opportunitiesas they arise. Theory of Change thinkingis a habit of thinking, not a product. A lotof benefit can be gained from simplystarting to think more broadly aboutchange and the realities of the context,and the people we want to support,before diving into thinking aboutactivities.

Theory of Change thinking should evolve,it does not need to be developed in onego. Assumptions take time to becomeclearer and so an iterative, stagedprocess that is integrated into otherlearning and planning processes canhelp to develop an outcomes-orientedoutlook and build the confidence to applyTheory of Change principles and thinkingat different levels and settings.

Isabel Vogel Independent consultantwww.isabelvogel.co.uk


Advanced Monitoring and Evaluation

2-6 July 2012 Location: OxfordCourse fee: £1045 non-residential/£1295 residential

This course gives participants a thorough understanding of howto influence the policy making process in their own context toachieve policy change. You will learn skills to help you plan anddeliver effective advocacy strategies; enhance your ability tolobby decision makers; and gain confidence in the ways inwhich you relate to different audiences. You will also have amore thorough understanding of power dynamics in anadvocacy context.

Monitoring and Evaluation (Foundation)

10-14 September 2012 Location: OxfordCourse fee: £1045 non-residential/£1295 residential

M&E is an essential component of international NGOs, NGOsand civil society organisations striving to continually improvetheir work and have greater accountability. Given the highdemand in the sector, this foundation course is designed todevelop individuals’ understanding of what M&E entails, why itis so vital, and how to do it well and in a participatory way. Thiscourse ensures that those who are new to M&E have a thoroughunderstanding of M&E concepts and have built up the practicalskills and the confidence needed to do M&E effectively.Participants will learn to use a range of M&E tools and activitiesthat will help them improve accountability, learning andeffectiveness of projects and programmes.

Gender Analysis and Planning

18-20 September 2012 Location: OxfordCourse fee: £595 non-residential/£745 residential

Development planners and NGOs are increasingly committed toincorporating a gender perspective into their programmes.However, many face challenges in its practical and systematicapplication to their work. This course will enable you toeffectively and systematically analyse contexts and plandevelopment and humanitarian programmes from a genderequality perspective.

INTRAC is a limited company No. 2663796 and a registered charity No. 1016676

INTRAC training For more information on these courses, to apply online, and to read details of all our training courses, visit www.intrac.org/pages/en/training.html

ISSN 1476-1327

ONTRAC is the newsletter of INTRAC (theInternational NGO Training and ResearchCentre). It is published three times a year.The contents of the newsletter may be freelyreproduced and translated, providing thesource is acknowledged. INTRAC wishes tothank the NGO Research Programmemembers for funding ONTRAC: Christian Aid UK, Cordaid, DanChurchAid, Norwegian

Church Aid, Save the Children Denmark and ICCO.

To receive a printed copy of ONTRAC, pleasecontact [email protected] indicating whetheryou wish to receive a copy in English orRussian. ONTRAC can also be downloaded atwww.intrac.org/pages/en/ontrac.html, wheretranslated versions in Arabic, French,Portuguese, Russian and Spanish, and previousissues, are also available.

Oxbridge Court, Osney Mead, Oxford OX2 0EST: +44 (0)1865 201851 F: +44 (0)1865 201852 E: [email protected] • www.intrac.org

Impact Assessment

11-13 June 2012 Location: OxfordCourse fee: £595 non-residential/£745 residential

This course explores some of the different approaches to impactassessment that can be used by NGOs; the value of planning forimpact; and how to build impact assessment into existingstructures and systems. It also offers an opportunity toexperiment with a number of tools and methods, and with how touse findings for organisational learning.

Child Rights-Based Approaches


This course provides participants with a clear understanding ofhow to use a child rights-based approach to develop andimplement projects and programmes that contribute toimprovements in children’s enjoyment of their rights toparticipation, protection, survival and development. The coursewill cover a range of areas including understanding childhoods,human rights and children’s rights principles and provisions, usingUN Conventions to achieve change for children, understandingand applying a human rights-based approach to development indifferent contexts and cultural settings and identi fying ways inwhich participants and their organisations can implement childrights in their own work practices.

Advocacy and Policy Influencing


This course gives participants a thorough understanding of howto influence the policy making process in their own context toachieve policy change. You will learn skills to help you plan anddeliver effective advocacy strategies; enhance your ability to lobbydecision makers; and gain confidence in the ways in which yourelate to different audiences. You will also have a more thoroughunderstanding of power dynamics in an advocacy context.

To receive a printed copy of our open training brochure or to enquire about tailor-made training, contact us at [email protected] or call 01865 263040.

to landfill

printed by seacourt: proud to be counted amongst the top three environmental printers in the world


Theory of Change: what’s it all about? · Concern Universal developing a Theory of Change....

Documents

Transcript of Theory of Change: what’s it all about? · Concern Universal developing a Theory of Change....