Theory Based Approach

An important insight from theory-based evaluations is that policy interventions are (often) believed to address and trigger certain social and behavioral responses among people and organizations while in reality this may not necessarily be the case. Theories linking interventions to outcomes should be carefully articulated. What are the causal pathways linking intervention outputs to processes of change and impact?

The intervention theory provides an overall framework for making sense of potential processes of change induced by an intervention. Several pieces of evidence can be used for articulating the intervention theory, for example:

• an intervention’s existing logical framework provides a useful starting point for mapping causal assumptions linked to objectives; other written documents produced within the framework of an intervention are also useful in this respect;
• insights provided by as well as expectations harbored by policy makers and staff (and other stakeholders) on how they think the intervention will affect/is affecting/has affected target groups;
• (written) evidence on past experiences of similar interventions (including those implemented by other organizations);
• research literature on mechanisms and processes of change in certain institutional contexts, for particular social problems, in specific sectors, etc.

Methods for reconstructing the underlying assumptions of project/program/policy theories are the following:

• a policy-scientific method, which focuses on interviews, documents and argumentation analysis;
• a strategic assessment method, which focuses on group dynamics and dialogue, and;
• an elicitation method, which focuses on cognitive and organizational psychology.

Central in all three approaches is the search for mechanisms that are believed to be ‘at work’ when a policy is implemented.

Source: 

Leeuw, F. & Vaessen, J. (2009): Impact Evaluations and Development. Nonie Guidance on Impact Evaluation. Draft Version for Discussion at the Cairo conference March-April, 2009. Nonie – Network on Impact Evaluation, p. 20-25.

Recommended Readings: 

Davidson,E.J. (2003): The “Baggaging” of Theory-Based Evaluation. In: Journal of Multi Disciplinary Evaluation, (4):iii-xiii. 

Davidson, E. J. (2004): Evaluation methodology basics: The nuts and bolts of sound evaluation. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Kellogg Foundation (2001): Logic Model Development Guide: Using LogicModels to Bring Together Planning, Evaluation, & Action. URL: http://www.wkkf.org/default.aspx?tabid=101&CID=281&CatID=281&ItemID=2813669&NID=20&LanguageID=0

Leeuw, F. (2003): Reconstructing program theories: methods available and problems to be solved .American Journal of Evaluation, 24 ( 1).

Pawson, R. (2003): Nothing as Practical as a Good Theory. In: Evaluation, vol. 9(4).

van der Knaap, P. (2004): Theory-based Evaluation and Learning : Possibilities and Challenges.In Evaluation, 10 (1), 16-34.