My Communities

There should always be a link between intermediate outcome and the ultimate outcome. Activities in the organization should lead to the path of achieving both

The ultimate outcome should be the utmost priority of establishing the organization

In my view, it is always nice to analyse the causal effect of each activity and goal, see if they will contribute positively to your ultimate outcome.

The model helps identify commonalities between end goals, to distill the goal into an ultimate outcome. This process helps guide the implementation, ensuring activities, outputs and intermediate outcomes are feeding into the realisation of this overarching outcome.

Your goals should all line up with your intended outcome. I found it easier to start with my intended ultimate outcomes and then my activities and fill in the gaps in the middle, sometimes going back and forth to make sure it was all allaigned.

I think there should be one cohesive, over arching goal with various activities and outcomes to meet the one major goal.

I agree with this too.

I am not clear on what is expected here. Are we to respond to the question in the first box or give thoughts on the module?
I believe that it is important to identify one ultimate outcome - it may be possible to find an ultimate outcome that combines the many perceived end outcomes which can become final intermediate outcomes.

I am not clear on what is expected here. Are we to respond to the question in the first box or give thoughts on the module?
I believe that it is important to identify one ultimate outcome - it may be possible to find an ultimate outcome that combines the many perceived end outcomes which can become final intermediate outcomes.

So I see that the directions for the Module 4 Discussion have been put in Module 5...

In my opinion the goal is too broad and very difficult to be achieved that sometimes or most of the times projects only contribute to and not completely achieve the goal. So it will be very difficult to have multiple goals.

I agree with this. If a nonprofit addresses two or three different issues (as mine does) it seems to be that they need their own models and this will inform the organisation on the right programmes to address each issue.

I agree with this. If a nonprofit addresses two or three different issues (as mine does) it seems to be that they need their own models and this will inform the organisation on the right programmes to address each issue.

Logical flow should be ensured in activities and goals, all the activities should contribute towards outcomes and should ensured end goals.

Logical flow should be ensured in activities and goals, all the activities should contribute towards outcomes and should ensured end goals.

I think it should be one goal at a time.
Just as it's been said on the audio clips of room to read theory of change, theory of change is always evolving. The more you get feedback and evaluate, the more you see new things to add and remove
But then, I guess it should be a goal at a time and just as it's being said, you might even end up coming up with an alternative or additional goals (aspirations goals) as a result of your efforts or enthusiasm

I think it should be one goal at a time.
Just as it's been said on the audio clips of room to read theory of change, theory of change is always evolving. The more you get feedback and evaluate, the more you see new things to add and remove
But then, I guess it should be a goal at a time and just as it's being said, you might even end up coming up with an alternative or additional goals (aspirations goals) as a result of your efforts or enthusiasm

Usually the ultimate goal is one. Therefore, everything is supposed to contribute to one or few ultimate goals. The plan therefore should follow suit

I think your theory of change should be well thought out and planned. It is the specific steps, in detail, needed to make the change (end goal). the more thought out and planned your theory of change is, the more effective your end goal will be. It will meet the beneficiaries needs better and produce minimal unintended outcomes. Sometimes unintended outcomes can be negative.

What about when you make your theory of change and have to explore multiple activities to satisfy the outcome? I am addressing homelessness and I have to come up with multiple locations to house the unhoused.

in my view, i think the outcome should be one. the goals should funnel into the the outcome.

I agree that a single ultimate outcome to direct all outcomes, outputs and activities to might be best.

Agreed. I believe that the intermediate outcomes will build to a single ultimate outcome. To me, the ultimate outcome would/should also be aligned with the overall vision of the organisation. At the end of the day, what are we looking to achieve? And the intermediate outcomes are then the mission/purpose... we will achieve the ultimate outcome/vision, through these intermediate outcomes.

Agreed. I believe that the intermediate outcomes will build to a single ultimate outcome. To me, the ultimate outcome would/should also be aligned with the overall vision of the organisation. At the end of the day, what are we looking to achieve? And the intermediate outcomes are then the mission/purpose... we will achieve the ultimate outcome/vision, through these intermediate outcomes.

I prefer having a goal fixed while the other plans can be altered aimed to achieve the goal

From my experience, I would give my suggestions as follows.

1. Establish the overall Objective/Goal in a single statement
2. Then, you can incorporate the sub-goals underneath.
   Thanks

The ultimate outcome should

No matter how many goals you have, i would like to think that somehow your intended outcomes will find a meeting point.

Theory of change is absolutely logical and dynamic

Theory of change is a must to create every social change.

Log frames can b a fruitful tool as it monitors the activities that too time bounded resulting in achievement of goals sometimes multiple goals at the end.

Atleast it provides an opportunity to rescale and redesign the module by intruding different activities which might reach to the objectives . As in these covid days this is an appropriate time to adopt it and see the results by monitoring this closely.

Good theory of change contains solutions to the identified problem to be solved, a solution to the direct cause of the problem identified and solutions to the indirect causes of the problem to be solved by the project. This means that a comprehensive theory of change will allow the drafting of implementation plan to be done smartly. when coming up with an implementation plan one need to have evidence that the activities to be implemented will really allow the project to accomplish the intended impact.

I couldn't see the peers assessment to leave comment, it was totally blank so I was filled those without knowing what the peers written.

You're right

Exactly! you see the activities are designed to achieve the immediate results and eventually the major outcome. Therefore they have to have a relationship

You're right

in my opinion, when solving a problem you must keep your consistency in planning in order to achieve your end goal basing on the facts on ground. once you have multi end goals, it because easy and keep you focused and consistent in what your doing.

So that's where the theory of change proves true. You have identified two 'end goals' but they are ultimately working together to accomplish one bigger goal, which then move them down to intermediate goals. If they don't align and "converge" as some of our colleagues have stated, they are not part of the same strategy and should be evaluated separately. However, is should be stated that if the goals are too far misaligned it could potentially add an err of collusion to those trying to align themselves with a cause.
*The Theory of Change is a great tool to utilize for big picture strategy as well as smaller campaigns such as community engagement, to help identify and address some of the pitfalls that may need to be overcome. Something as simple as a 'rained-out' community engagement event could throw a wrench in the plan.

"Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth." - Mike Tyson
Be ready to duck! Good Luck!

i agree and the actions should lead back to solving the problem.

Very necessary

great work! many document that are really useful for the ngo

I agree with you.

I will continue to develop my implementation plan.

C'est un module très instructif. On a tendance à faire des hypothèses quand aux besoins des bénéficiaires des programmes communautaires, mais cette session vient nous ramener à l'ordre.

C'est un module très instructif. On a tendance à faire des hypothèses quand aux besoins des bénéficiaires des programmes communautaires, mais cette session vient nous ramener à l'ordre.

C'est un module très instructif. On a tendance à faire des hypothèses quand aux besoins des bénéficiaires des programmes communautaires, mais cette session vient nous ramener à l'ordre.

If you have a more than one ultimate outcomes, I think you better have for them a different theory of change, and/or you revise them if not having any correlation that you can merge them.

Correctement msr

It is simple, start with activities, then outputs, intermediate results and final results. In other words, follow all the stages of implementation of the theory of change. By attaching activities to each final objective.

This course shows me that there are different ways to approach the development of o logical framework and project implementation plan

I think so as well. It is very similar to logframe

This has been the most challenging module yet and has really given me some deep introspectins and reflections. It was awesome.

Has it given you better and easier ways to go about it?

I like that break down. Nicely put.

In my opinion, the logical flow and links between objective levels (Activity, outputs, Intermediate Octcomes & Ultimate Outcome) at different levels are important. The theory of change approach can help us identify a weak or strong activity or outputs to achieved our project Ultimate outcomes. which is providing a learning and also ways to imrpove project activities etc

In my opinion there should be clear flow and logical relationship between the goals and activities.

Instead of replying to the only post available I will pose another question and hopefully that will help to extend the discussion. The outputs section of the implementation plan asks us as non-profit organizations to identify the number of beneficiaries served. If our non-profit isn't developed yet, or as a non-profit we haven't launched our activities yet, we can only estimate the number of beneficiaries we will serve. What happens if our efforts do not yield the number of beneficiaries estimated? Do we move forward with our implementation plan with the numbers we have available? Continue our efforts until we reach the intended number? Or is this an opportunity for us to provide a reference point where something went wrong and revisit our activities overall?

I understand the struggle because sometimes it feels like the ultimate outcome can be made up of multiple results. But my feeling is that if there is more than one ultimate outcome, there's the potential for more than one Theory of Change to be developed.

in my opinion when it comes to measure outcomes and another level behind it. It is good to choose one goal with its objectives and easier to achieve at time.

I found this module most helpful. Although I focused on one specific outcome, I can see using the Theory of Change model as part of our strategic process.

This module has actually encourage deep thinking

Completely agree that sometimes "estimated" the number of beneficiaries is not easy, as depends of the output, because I think depend of the step where we are. As in the beginning you will estimated a small quantity of beneficiaries and if the program is going correctly you can propose in a big scale.
I still need work in "Major Intermediate Outcomes" in the case of my project, be more clear.
I found that Theory of Change as implementation Plan help me a lot to clarify what "I can do" really and what I can't. As maybe I "want" to do a lot of activities for resolve your problem, but with this plan I understand that need to go to the roots and have real solutions, doesn't matter if are only a few, but that could possible in realization.

the module was interesting. however, there is still a mix up between the ultimate outcome and the intermediate outcomes.

There has to be linkage between activities and intermediate outcomes, and intermediate outcomes and final outcomes

The chart is a very effective method of fleshing out details for a program to decide what needs to be done to achieve the ultimate goal.

I agree.

The implementation plan is like a funnel: broad from the outside and narrow at the end. The theory change paradigm keeps an organization focused and compels it to constantly assess if their activities and outputs are bringing about the desired intermediate and ultimate outcomes.

Exactly, that is why the theory of change starts from the end goal, the final destination, the main objective.

One way to look at it would be: there should be one end goal and not multiple goals. There could be multiple objectives but all these must be synthesized into a single goal. That way, it is easier to understand your Theory of change and identify strong causal links from the activities to the ultimate outcome.

This has been the most challenging course ever. Nonetheless I have acquired knowledge and built my capacity and learnt from my peers. Key lesson: Your activities should link with the outputs, intermediate outcomes, and ultimate outcome.

The link between the activities, intermediate outcome and ultimate outcome should be in sync such that every activities will eventually lead to the overall impact indicated. And this should be measurable and evaluated from time to time.

I agree. We have evidence based programs that have at least 3 outcomes and to get those outcomes the activities are the same the major intermediate outcome being the program being implemented with fidelity.

How to combine multiple end goals with a consistent plan?
For this reason, we have to create a theory of change which shows the causal links between activities and its ultimate outcome. What kind of activities and by whom these activities should be done. After we should bring an output that result from the activities and lead to intermediate outcome. In this step we should understand which changes bring activities/outputs to the organization, beneficiaries. When we recognize our intermediate outcomes, we become more confident to achieve the result or our ultimate outcome.

This is such a great point. It is always challenging to see the factors that tie the different issues together in a way that is clearly actionable and sustainable.

Much of this may be trial and error, in a sense. Meeting frequently with your team to discuss triumphs and pitfalls and making necessary changes to improve the process should help identify common factors.

I have experience with the Logical Framework, and was very interesting to learn this new approach of the Theory of Change.

Thanks for the question according to me you can not come up with multiple end goals.... Try to outline your goals and be specific..

Thanks for the question according to me you can not come up with multiple end goals.... Try to outline your goals and be specific..

I think there should be a flow that is easily seen in the flow of the goals and overall goal with intermediate outcomes and ultimate outcomes.

This module has been very interesting. It has given me perspective about the real impact being generated
by our efforts, and allows me to question if there are other approaches that need to be considered. The ultimate goal
also needs to be simple and focused. We often tend to try to encompass too much.

By interlinking theory of change that shows the flow of links how inputs gives actiites and activities dives outputs and outputs gives outcome. This should be clearly justified to link.

Activities lead to the provision of services or products (output). outputs lead to changes (outcomes) and eventually this will contribute to the impact.

As for me, the theory of change can include one goal only. It develops a strategy to reach that goal. May be it contribute to reach common goal. So it provide a contribution but not the entire.

I agree with you.

Exactly.

I am still wondering how to manage events of crises when trying to achieve stated goals. any ideas?

well said

i think think the goals already determine the activity

Your Theory of change can always be subject to change everything there's new information or if other things need to be added

Combining multiple end goals with a consistent plan can be challenging, but it is possible with careful planning and coordination. Here are a few steps you can take:

1. Identify the commonalities and differences between the end goals: Look for areas where the goals overlap and where they diverge. This will help you identify the key strategies and activities that can be used to achieve multiple goals.

2. Prioritize the end goals: Determine which goals are most important and which ones can be achieved in the short-term versus the long-term. This will help you allocate resources and prioritize your efforts.

3. Develop a comprehensive plan: Create a plan that outlines the strategies, activities, and resources needed to achieve each goal. Make sure that the plan is flexible enough to accommodate changes and adjustments as needed.

4. Monitor and evaluate progress: Regularly monitor and evaluate progress towards each goal to ensure that the plan is working and to identify any areas that need improvement.

By following these steps, you can develop a comprehensive plan that addresses multiple end goals while maintaining consistency and focus.

The ultimate goal refers to the highest or most significant objective that one seeks to achieve. It represents the desired outcome or result that is considered the pinnacle or ultimate purpose of a particular endeavor.

When combining multiple end goals with a consistent plan in implementing the Theory of Change, one question that may arise is how to effectively align and prioritize these goals within the plan. Here are a few steps to consider:

1. Define the end goals: Clearly articulate and prioritize the multiple end goals that you aim to achieve within your program or initiative. Ensure that these goals are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART).

2. Identify linkages and interdependencies: Analyze the relationships and interdependencies among the different end goals. Determine if achieving one goal is a prerequisite for achieving another, or if they can be pursued simultaneously. This understanding will guide the sequencing and coordination of activities.

3. Determine strategic pathways: Identify different strategic pathways or approaches through which the end goals can be achieved. Consider different scenarios or combinations of activities that are most likely to lead to the desired outcomes for each goal.

4. Develop a consistent plan: Develop an implementation plan that outlines the sequence of activities needed to achieve each end goal. Ensure that the plan is consistent and coherent, addressing all the key elements required for success, such as resources, timeline, roles and responsibilities, monitoring and evaluation, and potential risks.

5. Create synergy and alignment: Look for opportunities to create synergy and alignment across the multiple end goals. Identify activities or strategies that can contribute to the achievement of multiple goals simultaneously, thus maximizing efficiency and effectiveness.

6. Prioritize actions: Consider the relative importance and urgency of each end goal. If conflicts arise, prioritize activities that have the most significant impact or are more time-sensitive. This prioritization will help focus resources and efforts where they are most needed.

7. Continuous monitoring and adaptation: Regularly monitor progress towards each end goal and evaluate the effectiveness of the overall plan. Adapt the plan as necessary based on emerging findings, feedback, and contextual changes to ensure that it remains relevant and aligned with the desired outcomes.e implementation of the Theory of Change.

By following these steps, you can combine multiple end goals with a consistent plan that accounts for their interdependencies, maximizes alignment, and guides effectiv

When combining multiple end goals with a consistent plan in implementing the Theory of Change, one question that may arise is how to effectively align and prioritize these goals within the plan. Here are a few steps to consider:

1. Define the end goals: Clearly articulate and prioritize the multiple end goals that you aim to achieve within your program or initiative. Ensure that these goals are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART).

2. Identify linkages and interdependencies: Analyze the relationships and interdependencies among the different end goals. Determine if achieving one goal is a prerequisite for achieving another, or if they can be pursued simultaneously. This understanding will guide the sequencing and coordination of activities.

3. Determine strategic pathways: Identify different strategic pathways or approaches through which the end goals can be achieved. Consider different scenarios or combinations of activities that are most likely to lead to the desired outcomes for each goal.

4. Develop a consistent plan: Develop an implementation plan that outlines the sequence of activities needed to achieve each end goal. Ensure that the plan is consistent and coherent, addressing all the key elements required for success, such as resources, timeline, roles and responsibilities, monitoring and evaluation, and potential risks.

5. Create synergy and alignment: Look for opportunities to create synergy and alignment across the multiple end goals. Identify activities or strategies that can contribute to the achievement of multiple goals simultaneously, thus maximizing efficiency and effectiveness.

6. Prioritize actions: Consider the relative importance and urgency of each end goal. If conflicts arise, prioritize activities that have the most significant impact or are more time-sensitive. This prioritization will help focus resources and efforts where they are most needed.

7. Continuous monitoring and adaptation: Regularly monitor progress towards each end goal and evaluate the effectiveness of the overall plan. Adapt the plan as necessary based on emerging findings, feedback, and contextual changes to ensure that it remains relevant and aligned with the desired outcomes.e implementation of the Theory of Change.

By following these steps, you can combine multiple end goals with a consistent plan that accounts for their interdependencies, maximizes alignment, and guides effective

There shouldn't be multiple ultimate outcome

I think it could be hard to differentiate intermediate outcome and ultimate outcome but at the end of the day there is one ultimate outcome.

The ultimate outcome is aspirational. You will always be working toward that goal and applying the most effective activities in order to reach it. As many others have said, your theory of change will always be evolving based on feedback and effectiveness of the activities.
It's unlikely and rare that you will reach that ultimate goal. You are essentially working to lessen the negative impacts that lead to the need of your organization in the first place. In nonprofit, you are striving to work yourself out of a job, but these are big issues we are addressing and therefore, we're not likely to fully solve them.

It is critical to note that activities/outputs what organizations do and the outcomes are what result from those activities and in this case, the organizations do not have any control over the outcomes. When designing the theory of change, it is important that you start from right to left. You need to start your ultimate outcome first and working backward, intermediate outcomes and activities that are the building blocks for the ultimate outcome to that root.

It is critical to note that activities/outputs what organizations do and the outcomes are what result from those activities and in this case, the organizations do not have any control over the outcomes. When designing the theory of change, it is important that you start from right to left. You need to start your ultimate outcome first and working backward, intermediate outcomes and activities that are the building blocks for the ultimate outcome to that root.

I think the simplest thing to do is break it down and then you can see where things overlap and put it back together in a way that makes the most logical sense but I wouldn't be afraid to break each goal down and even restate activities that go with each goal so you can see where they all overlap and what things might need to be address to address just one or two areas of a bigger goal.

To combine multiple end goals with a consistent plan, you can use a systems approach. This means thinking about how the different parts of your plan are interconnected and how they can work together to achieve your desired outcome.

Here are some tips for combining multiple end goals with a consistent plan:

Identify your core goals. What are the most important things that you want to achieve? Once you know your core goals, you can start to develop a plan that addresses all of them.
Break down your goals into smaller steps. This will make it easier to develop a feasible plan and to track your progress.
Identify the relationships between your goals. How can you achieve your goals more effectively by working on them together?
Develop a plan that is flexible and adaptable. Things don't always go according to plan, so it's important to be able to adjust your plan as needed.