Article Text

Download PDFPDF

How to and how not to develop a theory of change to evaluate a complex intervention: reflections on an experience in the Democratic Republic of Congo
  1. Rishma Maini,
  2. Sandra Mounier-Jack,
  3. Josephine Borghi
  1. Faculty of Public Health Policy, Global Health Department, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Rishma Maini; mainirishma{at}gmail.com

Abstract

Theories of change (ToCs) describe how interventions can bring about long-term outcomes through a logical sequence of intermediate outcomes and have been used to design and measure the impact of public health programmes in several countries. In recognition of their capacity to provide a framework for monitoring and evaluation, they are being increasingly employed in the development sector. The construction of a ToC typically occurs through a consultative process, requiring stakeholders to reflect on how their programmes can bring about change. ToCs help make explicit any underlying assumptions, acknowledge the role of context and provide evidence to justify the chain of causal pathways. However, while much literature exists on how to develop a ToC with respect to interventions in theory, there is comparatively little reflection on applying it in practice to complex interventions in the health sector. This paper describes the initial process of developing a ToC to inform the design of an evaluation of a complex intervention aiming to improve government payments to health workers in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Lessons learnt include: the need for the ToC to understand how the intervention produces effects on the wider system and having broad stakeholder engagement at the outset to maximise chances of the intervention’s success and ensure ownership. Power relationships between stakeholders may also affect the ToC discourse but can be minimised by having an independent facilitator. We hope these insights are of use to other global public health practitioners using this approach to evaluate complex interventions.

  • health systems evaluation
  • public health
  • other study design

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Handling editor Seye Abimbola

  • Contributors RM facilitated the workshops and drafted the initial manuscript. SM-J and JB helped to write the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

  • Funding The workshops were funded by the UK Government’s Department for International Development as part of the ASSP Project.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent Obtained.

  • Ethics approval The process evaluation received human subjects review and approval from the Tulane University Institutional Review Board (reference number: 14-633280), the Kinshasa School of Public Health Ethics Committee (reference number: ESP/CE/024/2014) and the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Research Ethics Committee (Reference number: 8475). Informed written consent was obtained from all those participating in the study.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Data sharing statement No additional data are available.