In this blog my aim is by writing (and reading) every week, I hope to crack some of the strategic problems in my day-to-day work.
This post is the third in a series on Theory of Change (ToC). In previous posts, I have written about the need for a Long Term Impact Goal, and how we've worked backwards to the Outcome level below. In this post I will address the most important question: what are our key activities / outputs and how will we know they have been successful?
In her fantastic book on charitable giving, Caroline Fiennes introduces the idea of 'Breadth v Certainty'. In the triangle below, we see that interventions around an individual are easier to track and more likely to succeed, however those nearer the base aim at a broader scope but are more difficult to attribute impact.
"This triangle is useful in virtually any sector where charities operate...at the top, work is close to the beneficiary and therefore has low risk but limited scope; further down, work is more distant from the beneficiary, has a risk of failing completely, but has very broad impact if it succeeds" [p. 3 2012]
In the case of Independent Schools, Bursary giving would sit at the top of the triangle and Partnerships lower down. Bursaries offer depth of experience for individuals and impact is fairly easy to track; consequently, it can be a more emotive cause for fundraisers.
Conversely, partnership / outreach activities can affect many more children but it can be more difficult to attribute impact. Think of a careers event for primary students - we can plant the '
golden seeds' and aim to change attitudes and norms, but as Fiennes puts it, "societal attitudes are influenced by many factors". In brief,
we need to tailor our impact measurement depending on where activities sit in the triangle.
[Click to see image more clearly]
In our outreach work last year, we settled on a model that chimes with the triangle above:
- where the intervention is less certain or measurable, we aim to reach big numbers, usually at primary age. While the impact is hard to measure and to attribute over time, planting as many seeds as possible means more may flower, especially when aiming to raise aspirations and cultural capital.
- at the top of the triangle, more targeted interventions for smaller groups of individuals are much easier to attribute impact and therefore justify the relative time and cost resource: think UCAS personal statement and interview support for aspiring medics, as we did with a small number of students last year.
Next week I will address three key questions around Impact as suggested by Fiennes [p. 175]
"...to cut through the complexity we need to know 3 things:
- what happened?
- to what extent was that due to us?
- how do our results compare to other charities?"
Reading
Fiennes, C. (2012) It ain't what you give, it's the way that you give it. [Giving Evidence]
Link
Comments
Post a Comment