Theory of change: what has to be true for this to work?

A theory of change names what has to be true for this project to actually work. It is the difference between an output (we did the thing) and an outcome (the thing mattered).

Most community projects are funded against outputs ("we will deliver 250 survey responses") but lived against outcomes ("our members will tell us they feel heard, and the program will change because of it"). The theory of change is the bridge between the two.

A workable theory of change is one paragraph. It says: if we deliver these objectives, AND these conditions hold (members trust the survey, leadership commits to act on findings, language access works), THEN we will see these outcomes (members tell us they feel heard, the program changes, retention improves) and contribute to this longer-term change (a member-led program model). The "AND these conditions hold" clause is what most theories of change skip and why most projects feel hollow at the end.

Writing a theory of change is the moment your project is most open to honest critique. Ask one person you trust — not on the project — to read your paragraph and circle the assumption they are least sure about. That circled phrase is where the project's actual risk lives.

You will not finalize the theory of change today. You will draft it, share it with the team, and refine it as the project teaches you what was true and what was a hope.