Keerti Kanchinadam and Alex Aja - December 10, 2024
Getty Images Licensed under the Unsplash+ License
Evaluation is a core piece of what we do at LFA. And while each evaluation is unique, we almost always start our process by grounding in a Theory of Change (TOC). Why? Because we believe that thoughtful conversations around what you do, who you are targeting, why and how you do it, and what you expect and hope to achieve are essential grounding for equity-driven learning and evaluation.
Over the years, LFA has done a lot of TOC work with clients and we’ve written a lot about TOCs too (for example, check out the Better Results Toolkit for a plethora of information on why TOC’s are important and worksheets and resources for developing an effective one). But all of that is not what we want to talk about today!
What If It Isn’t Business as Usual?
Today we wanted to zoom out and share reflections on how we approach TOC development work - particularly the values we lean into as we strive to embed equity in all aspects of evaluation and learning practices.
We recently facilitated a TOC process with a client whose program supports undocumented day laborers to find fair and safe work. I can’t tell you exactly why we felt this way, but we simply just didn’t want to do business as usual with this TOC process. We might not have articulated it this way up front, but as our team reflects on the process, now it’s clear we were eager to put into more robust practice the equity-centered ideas and values we had been discussing for so long.
And frankly, the process and the outcomes of this work felt so good! We want everyone to experience joyous, affirming, easeful, and useful TOCs! So, we’ve rounded up some of our reflections in this blog.
Four Ways We Leaned into Equity-Centered Practices in TOC Development:
We de-centered ourselves as the “experts”. We wanted the process to feel collaborative, conversational, and organic, instead of technical, rigid, and chock full of evaluator jargon. We sought to be an active partner in developing something alongside the program staff, as opposed to a teacher of how to do TOCs. It was almost as if we were developing a TOC without saying the words TOC. Rather than focusing on the end product or even the individual components of a TOC, we engaged in a natural dialogue about the program and the work.
We actively brought our full selves. Yes, we’re evaluators and consultants, but we are so much more than that. And even in those roles, we recognize that we are never objective. We leaned into this and brought our own perspectives, experiences, and values. In doing so, we built greater trust and were able to be more authentic partners.
We noticed and named power dynamics, history, and context. Everyone in the room knew the history and structural choices that led to the very inequities people in this program grapple with. And so, we brought it into the conversation. More so, we engaged in honest and truthful dialogue about power dynamics surrounding and influencing the program.
We welcomed possibilities and the vision of the world we seek to build. We valued and validated outcomes beyond tangible outputs as important and necessary. We thought about outcomes that wouldn’t lead to the overemphasis of quantitative data and would challenge White dominant ways of knowing, instead welcoming stories, observations, and feelings.
We’d love to hear about the ways that you have centered equity in your TOC development processes. Please share in the comments below!