rigorous and pragmatic, and be attuned to the realities and pressures of project
implementation.
Beyond these broad aims, and unlike in many accountability-styled evaluations,
the evaluative approach was not limited by pre-specified requirements in terms of
questions, stakeholders or methods of inquiry. As the project itself evolved over
time, we tailored the evaluative method to project needs.
The method also reflects elements of several ‘types’ of evaluation practices that
are variously described by theorists, researchers and evaluation practitioners. This
section unbundles what is meant by ‘theory-based’ and ‘developmental’ approaches
to evaluation, and maps key characteristics of these approaches that were relevant
to the CC-CBA project context.
16.3.1 Theory of Change Based Evaluation
‘Program theory’, also referred to ‘theory-based’ or ‘theory-of-change (TOC) based
evaluation’ refers to developing a causal model from project activities (inputs) to a
series of outcomes, then using this model as the basis for evaluation.
14 It is widely
used for evaluations across sectors including to evaluate aid and development
interventions.
15 Theory of change-based evaluation generally uses the theory
established at program design, not just to trace if different steps actually occurred,
but also to test the assumptions between the causal links in the model.
16 Findings
from these types of evaluations can also be used to improve the ‘quality’ of theories,
including by investigating alternative causal explanations to that incorporated into
the initial theory of change.
17
When framing an evaluation around a theory of change for a child-centred,
community-based CCA project, the context for evaluation is a complex system that
does not allow for a “neat” or “predictable” TOC to be articulated at the outset.
CCA projects are usually dynamic and emergent interventions – whilst parameters
and activities are set at the design stage, the exact details of implementation need to
emerge and be developed over the course of implementation. For example, community participation in adaptation planning will always result in actions and
14 Rogers (2000) in Rogers, P. J. 2008. “Using Programme Theory to Evaluate Complicated and
Complex Aspects of Interventions.” Evaluation 14(1):29–48. doi: 10.1177/1356389007084674
15 Rogers, Patricia J. and Carol H. Weiss. 2007. “Theory-Based Evaluation: Reflections Ten Years
On: Theory-Based Evaluation: Past, Present, and Future.” New Directions for Evaluation 2007
(114):63–81. doi: 10.1002/ev.225
16 White, Howard. 2009. “Theory-Based Impact Evaluation: Principles and Practice.” Journal of
Development Effectiveness 1(3):271–84.
17 Rogers, Patricia J. and Carol H. Weiss. 2007. “Theory-Based Evaluation: Reflections Ten Years
On: Theory-Based Evaluation: Past, Present, and Future.” New Directions for Evaluation 2007
(114):63–81. doi: 10.1002/ev.225
16 Evaluating Climate Change Adaptation in Practice: A Child-Centred. . .
295
implementation.
Beyond these broad aims, and unlike in many accountability-styled evaluations,
the evaluative approach was not limited by pre-specified requirements in terms of
questions, stakeholders or methods of inquiry. As the project itself evolved over
time, we tailored the evaluative method to project needs.
The method also reflects elements of several ‘types’ of evaluation practices that
are variously described by theorists, researchers and evaluation practitioners. This
section unbundles what is meant by ‘theory-based’ and ‘developmental’ approaches
to evaluation, and maps key characteristics of these approaches that were relevant
to the CC-CBA project context.
16.3.1 Theory of Change Based Evaluation
‘Program theory’, also referred to ‘theory-based’ or ‘theory-of-change (TOC) based
evaluation’ refers to developing a causal model from project activities (inputs) to a
series of outcomes, then using this model as the basis for evaluation.
14 It is widely
used for evaluations across sectors including to evaluate aid and development
interventions.
15 Theory of change-based evaluation generally uses the theory
established at program design, not just to trace if different steps actually occurred,
but also to test the assumptions between the causal links in the model.
16 Findings
from these types of evaluations can also be used to improve the ‘quality’ of theories,
including by investigating alternative causal explanations to that incorporated into
the initial theory of change.
17
When framing an evaluation around a theory of change for a child-centred,
community-based CCA project, the context for evaluation is a complex system that
does not allow for a “neat” or “predictable” TOC to be articulated at the outset.
CCA projects are usually dynamic and emergent interventions – whilst parameters
and activities are set at the design stage, the exact details of implementation need to
emerge and be developed over the course of implementation. For example, community participation in adaptation planning will always result in actions and
14 Rogers (2000) in Rogers, P. J. 2008. “Using Programme Theory to Evaluate Complicated and
Complex Aspects of Interventions.” Evaluation 14(1):29–48. doi: 10.1177/1356389007084674
15 Rogers, Patricia J. and Carol H. Weiss. 2007. “Theory-Based Evaluation: Reflections Ten Years
On: Theory-Based Evaluation: Past, Present, and Future.” New Directions for Evaluation 2007
(114):63–81. doi: 10.1002/ev.225
16 White, Howard. 2009. “Theory-Based Impact Evaluation: Principles and Practice.” Journal of
Development Effectiveness 1(3):271–84.
17 Rogers, Patricia J. and Carol H. Weiss. 2007. “Theory-Based Evaluation: Reflections Ten Years
On: Theory-Based Evaluation: Past, Present, and Future.” New Directions for Evaluation 2007
(114):63–81. doi: 10.1002/ev.225
16 Evaluating Climate Change Adaptation in Practice: A Child-Centred. . .
295