Impact Framework

Map the causal chain from activities to systemic change

Beyond Activity Lists

Projects fail when teams confuse doing things with changing things. You can install 1,000 solar panels and still have zero climate impact if no one uses them.

The difference: A Theory of Change forces you to map the causal logic from your activities to your ultimate goals. It makes assumptions explicit, identifies where evidence is weak, and shows where monitoring must focus.

📊 The Impact Pathway Model

Every climate project follows this sequence. Weak links anywhere break the chain.

💰

1. Inputs

Resources invested: money, people, equipment, time, partnerships

Example: $500K, 5 staff, solar equipment, 2-year timeline
⚙️

2. Activities

What you do with those inputs: programs, services, events, advocacy

Example: Train technicians, install systems, run awareness campaign
📦

3. Outputs

Direct, countable results of activities: things delivered or completed

Example: 50 technicians certified, 200 systems installed, 5,000 people reached
🔄

4. Outcomes

Short-to-medium term changes in behavior, knowledge, conditions, status

Example: Households adopt clean energy, reduce grid dependence, technicians earn income
🌍

5. Impact

Long-term, systemic changes aligned with your ultimate goal

Example: Regional CO₂ emissions reduced 15%, energy access improved, resilient economy

🛤️ Interactive: Build Your Impact Pathway

Select elements from each stage to create your project's theory of change. The tool shows how inputs flow through activities, outputs, outcomes, and ultimately to impact.

🎯 How to Build Your Impact Pathway

1. Select nodes from each stage that represent your project

2. Trace the logic: Inputs → Activities → Outputs → Outcomes → Impact

3. Click "Suggest Connections" to see common patterns, or build your own

Inputs

Resources invested

Activities

What you do

Outputs

Direct results

Outcomes

Changes in behavior/conditions

Impact

Long-term systemic change

🛤️

Select nodes to map your project's theory of change

❓ Five Questions to Stress-Test Your Logic

1. Is the Causal Link Evidence-Based?

For each arrow in your pathway, ask: "How do we know A leads to B?"

Good: "Research shows farmers who receive training increase yields by 20-30%" (evidence)
Weak: "Training will improve outcomes" (assumption)

2. What Could Break This Link?

Identify external factors that could disrupt your logic chain.

Example: "Training leads to adoption" breaks if: cost barriers, cultural resistance, lack of maintenance support, competing technologies emerge

3. How Long Does Each Stage Take?

Outcomes don't happen instantly. Map realistic timelines.

Outputs: Immediate to 6 months | Outcomes: 6 months to 3 years | Impact: 3-10+ years

4. Who Else Contributes to This Change?

You're rarely the only actor. What's your specific contribution?

Be honest about attribution vs. contribution. Don't claim credit for systemic changes with multiple causes.

5. How Will You Know It's Working?

Define specific, measurable indicators for each stage.

Output: # systems installed | Outcome: % adoption rate, user satisfaction | Impact: tons CO₂ reduced, verified by third party

📚 Case Study: Forest Restoration in Kenya

The Initial Theory of Change (Flawed)

Inputs: $2M, NGO staff → Activities: Plant 1M trees → Outputs: 1M trees planted → Outcomes: Forest restored → Impact: Carbon sequestered

Problem: Jumped from planting to impact without considering survival, maintenance, or community behavior

The Revised Theory of Change (Reality-Based)

Inputs: $2M + Community co-investment + Local gov partnership
Activities: Train community nurseries + Plant native species + Establish benefit-sharing agreements + Monitor survival
Outputs: 500K trees planted (adjusted for realism) + 200 community members trained + 10 nurseries operational + Survival monitoring system
Outcomes: 70% tree survival at 3 years + Communities earn income from nurseries + Reduced illegal logging + Improved watershed health
Impact: 150K tons CO₂ sequestered over 20 years + Biodiversity recovery + Improved livelihoods + Climate resilience

What Changed

  • Realistic outputs: Halved tree target based on survival data
  • Added critical outcomes: Economic incentives for maintenance
  • Explicit assumptions: Community ownership drives long-term care
  • Measurable indicators: Survival rates, income data, carbon verification
  • Timeline honesty: 20-year impact horizon, not 3-year fantasy

📈 From Theory of Change to M&E Framework

Your impact pathway directly informs monitoring and evaluation. Each stage needs indicators:

StageWhat to MeasureData SourceFrequency
InputsBudget spent, staff hours, equipment deliveredFinancial records, timesheetsMonthly
Activities# trainings conducted, systems installed, events heldActivity logs, attendance sheetsWeekly/Monthly
Outputs# people trained, materials distributed, reachCompletion records, distribution logsMonthly
OutcomesBehavior change, adoption rates, satisfaction, conditionsSurveys, usage data, assessmentsQuarterly/Annually
ImpactCO₂ reduction, system-level changes, long-term trendsThird-party verification, studiesAnnually/End-of-project
Critical Rule: Focus most monitoring on outcomes (where change happens) not just outputs (what you deliver). 500 people trained means nothing if behavior doesn't change.