# Theory of Change: [Programme or organisation name]

> A theory of change explains how and why a set of activities is expected
> to lead to a long-term goal: the problem, the goal, the pathway of
> preconditions and outcomes, the interventions, the assumptions behind
> each link, indicators for every outcome and the evidence base. Based on
> common practice in international development and nonprofit programme
> design. Replace every `[bracketed]` value and every row marked *Example*.

<!--
Guidance: How to use this template
- Work backwards: define the long-term goal first, then ask "what must be
  true before this can happen?" until you reach things your activities
  can directly change.
- Write outcomes as changed states ("Parents read with children weekly"),
  not activities ("Run reading workshops").
- Make assumptions explicit for every arrow you are unsure of; they are
  where programmes usually fail.
- Build it with staff, partners and the people the programme serves, and
  revisit it at least yearly.
-->

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| ToC ID | [TOC-2026-01] |
| Programme | [Programme name] |
| Organisation | [Organisation name] |
| Geography | [*Example:* three districts in [Region]] |
| Time horizon | [*Example:* 5 years, YYYY to YYYY] |
| Owner | @name |
| Version | [0.1] |
| Status | [Draft / Validated with stakeholders / Approved] |
| Last updated | YYYY-MM-DD |

## 1. Problem statement

<!-- Guidance: Describe the problem, who experiences it, its scale and its root causes, with sources. Avoid describing the absence of your programme as the problem. -->

[*Example:* In [Region], 42% of children finish primary year 3 unable to
read a simple paragraph (national learning assessment, YYYY). Root causes
identified in community consultations and district data include few
books at home, large class sizes (average 58 pupils), limited teacher
training in early reading, and parents who are unsure how to support
reading.]

| Root cause | Evidence | Within our influence? |
|---|---|---|
| *Example:* Few age-appropriate books at home | Household survey, n = 600, YYYY | Yes |
| *Example:* Teachers lack early-reading methods | District training records | Yes, with partners |
| *Example:* Class sizes above 50 | Ministry statistics | No; context factor |
| [Cause] | [Source] | [Yes / Partly / No] |

## 2. Long-term goal

<!-- Guidance: The lasting change you are working towards, which your programme contributes to but does not deliver alone. One sentence, specific to population and place. -->

[*Example:* By YYYY, children in the three target districts complete
primary year 3 reading with comprehension at the national benchmark.]

Target population: [*Example:* about 24,000 children aged 6 to 9 in 120 schools].

## 3. Outcomes pathway

<!-- Guidance: Show the chain of preconditions from activities to the goal. The diagram gives the shape; section 3.1 describes each outcome. Keep diagram labels short and mirror the IDs used in the tables. -->

The diagram shows how intermediate outcomes build towards the long-term
goal. Arrows mean "is a precondition for".

```mermaid
flowchart BT
    A1["Teacher training in early reading"] --> O1["OC-1 Teachers use structured reading methods"]
    A2["Book distribution and libraries"] --> O2["OC-2 Children have books at home and school"]
    A3["Parent reading sessions"] --> O3["OC-3 Parents read with children weekly"]
    O1 --> O4["OC-4 Children practise reading daily"]
    O2 --> O4
    O3 --> O4
    O4 --> O5["OC-5 Reading fluency improves"]
    O5 --> G["Goal: year 3 children read at benchmark"]
```

### 3.1 Outcome descriptions

| ID | Outcome | Level | Who changes | Timeframe |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OC-1 | *Example:* Teachers use structured reading methods in class | Short-term | Teachers | Year 1 to 2 |
| OC-2 | *Example:* Children have regular access to levelled books | Short-term | Children, schools | Year 1 |
| OC-3 | *Example:* Parents read or tell stories with children at least weekly | Short-term | Parents | Year 1 to 2 |
| OC-4 | *Example:* Children practise reading daily | Intermediate | Children | Year 2 to 3 |
| OC-5 | *Example:* Reading fluency and comprehension improve | Intermediate | Children | Year 3 to 4 |
| [OC-N] | [Outcome] | [Level] | [Group] | [Timeframe] |

## 4. Interventions

<!-- Guidance: The activities your organisation and partners deliver, linked to the outcome each one targets. If an outcome has no intervention, either a partner covers it or it is an assumption. -->

| ID | Intervention | Targets outcome | Delivered by | Scale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IN-1 | *Example:* 5-day teacher training plus monthly coaching visits | OC-1 | [Organisation] with district education office | 480 teachers |
| IN-2 | *Example:* Classroom libraries and take-home book bags | OC-2 | [Organisation] | 120 schools |
| IN-3 | *Example:* Monthly parent reading sessions in local language | OC-3 | Community volunteers | 6,000 families |
| [IN-N] | [Intervention] | [OC-N] | [Who] | [Scale] |

## 5. Assumptions

<!-- Guidance: Conditions that must hold for each link to work. Note the evidence for each and how you will monitor it. Weak assumptions need a plan B. -->

| ID | Assumption | Link | Evidence strength | How monitored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AS-1 | *Example:* Head teachers allow class time for reading practice | OC-1 to OC-4 | Medium: 9 of 12 pilot schools did | School visits each term |
| AS-2 | *Example:* Parents with low literacy can support reading through storytelling | OC-3 to OC-4 | Medium: published studies in similar contexts | Parent survey |
| AS-3 | *Example:* Teachers are not transferred mid-year in large numbers | IN-1 to OC-1 | Low: transfers rose last year | District records |
| [AS-N] | [Assumption] | [Link] | [Strength and source] | [Method] |

External factors outside the programme's control: [*Example:* school
closures due to weather or health emergencies; changes to national
curriculum].

## 6. Indicators per outcome

<!-- Guidance: At least one indicator per outcome, with baseline, target, data source and frequency. Prefer indicators already collected by partners where they are good enough. -->

| Outcome | Indicator | Baseline | Target | Data source | Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OC-1 | *Example:* % of observed lessons using the structured method | 8% | 70% | Classroom observation tool | Termly |
| OC-2 | *Example:* Books borrowed per child per month | 0.3 | 4 | Library logs | Monthly |
| OC-3 | *Example:* % of parents reporting weekly reading or storytelling | 21% | 60% | Household survey | Yearly |
| OC-4 | *Example:* Minutes of reading practice per child per day | 5 | 20 | Time-use sample | Yearly |
| OC-5 | *Example:* Correct words per minute, year 3 | 18 | 45 | Oral reading fluency assessment | Yearly |
| Goal | *Example:* % of year 3 pupils at national benchmark | 58% | 80% | National assessment | Every 2 years |

## 7. Evidence base

<!-- Guidance: Summarise the research and practice evidence that supports the pathway, and be honest about gaps. Cite sources so others can check. -->

| Link or approach | Evidence | Source | Strength |
|---|---|---|---|
| *Example:* Structured pedagogy improves early reading | Multiple randomised evaluations in low-income settings | [Systematic review, Author, Year] | Strong |
| *Example:* Book access alone has limited effect | Mixed results without teaching support | [Study, Year] | Moderate |
| *Example:* Parent engagement in local language | Promising, few rigorous studies | [Study, Year]; own pilot YYYY | Emerging |
| [Link] | [Evidence] | [Source] | [Strong / Moderate / Emerging] |

Evidence gaps and learning questions:

- [*Example:* Does coaching frequency below monthly still change practice?]
- [*Example:* Which parent-session format works best for fathers?]

## 8. Review and use

<!-- Guidance: Say how the theory of change will be used (planning, monitoring, reporting) and when it will be reviewed. -->

- **Used for**: [programme design, monitoring framework, funder reporting, staff induction]
- **Review cycle**: [*Example:* yearly learning review each [month]; immediate review if an assumption fails]
- **Participants in review**: [staff, partners, community representatives]

| Version | Date | Author | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1 | YYYY-MM-DD | @name | First draft from design workshop |
| [N] | YYYY-MM-DD | @name | [Change] |

## Standard and licence note

Based on common theory-of-change practice used in international
development and nonprofit programme design (backwards mapping from a
long-term goal, preconditions, assumptions and indicators). Template
licence: MIT.