Theory of change for PASTURES OF HOPE
Pastures of Hope International ®
Pastures of Hope International (USA) and Pastures of Hope (Uganda) are officially registered as charity organizations in their respective countries. As one, we are working together to providing essential services that positively impact the lives of our
beneficiaries.
Pasture’s of Hope International is giving information, raising awareness and hence fundraising direct help towards our mission. Our mission is focused on supporting vulnerable children and communities in Uganda through formal education, advocacy, medical care, business seed capital, and skilling. In 2015 we came together as a people with common history with the vulnerable children we work with so that we can make a difference in their lives too. We are steadfast in our belief that every child deserves access to quality education, healthcare, food and the tools they need to succeed. We stand alongside these children and their families, working hand in hand to tackle the challenges of abject poverty they face. Your involvement as a sponsor, partner or volunteer can truly make a difference. We are Empowering Children, Transforming Communities, we are change agents.
Problem state
- Critical Lack of Infrastructure: Many communities have no or limited school, or existing structures are dilapidated (e.g., mud-and-stick walls, dirt floors, leaking roofs). Overcrowding is rampant, with pupil-classroom ratios often exceeding 100:1
- Barriers to Access: Long distances to the nearest school, especially in rural areas, prevent many children, particularly girls, from attending.
- Poor Learning Environment: The absence of basic facilities like separate gender latrines, clean water points, libraries, and furniture hinders effective learning and contributes to high dropout rates
- Systemic Weaknesses: Under-resourced teachers, lack of instructional materials, and low community involvement in school management perpetuate a cycle of low educational outcomes.
- Those who enroll in schools lack foundational literacy skills ( that is to say; unable to read or understand simple text by the age of 10)
Stage | Key Activities (What We Do) | Short & Medium-Term Outcomes (The Changes We Expect) | Long-Term Impact (The Ultimate Goal) |
INPUTS | School Construction & Rehabilitation: Build permanent, storm-resistant, standard furnished classroom. – Construct gender-separated, improved sanitation latrines. – Install boreholes and rainwater harvesting tanks for clean water.Capacity Building: Train teachers in child-centered pedagogy. – Provide teaching/learning materials, sanitary pads Community Mobilization: Form and train School Management Committees (SMCs) & Parent-Teacher Associations (PTAs). – Establish income-generating projects for school sustainability | Improved Physical Environment:Safe, weather-proof, and un-crowded classrooms. – Reduced waterborne diseases and improved hygiene. – Dignified and safe facilities, especially for adolescent girls.Enhanced Teaching Quality:Teachers are better equipped and motivatedIncreased Community Ownership:Parents and leaders actively participate in school governance and maintenance | A cycle of poverty is broken Children graduate with: -Improved literacy and numeracy skills. -Better health and well-being. – Increased self-confidence and aspiration. – Higher chances of pursuing secondary education or skilled employment. → This leads to greater economic productivity, informed citizenship, and a more equipped and equitable society. |
OUTPUTS | Advocacy & Systems Strengthening: Lobby local government for more teachers and support.Integrate with national education policies. | Increased Access & Participation:Enrollment rates rise, especially for girl child. Daily attendance improves (shorter distance, less tired)Student retention rates increase (Lower dropout). | |
OUTCOMES | Improved Learning Outcomes: –
| ||
IMPACT | Sustainable System:
|
Principles Underpinning the Theory
- Community-Led Development: The community contributes land, local materials, and labor. This fosters a sense of ownership, which is crucial for the long-term maintenance and sustainability of the school.
Holistic Approach: Building classrooms alone is not enough. The theory integrates WASH (Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene), teacher training, and girl-child support to address all major barriers to education.
Partnerships: Collaboration with Uganda’s Ministry of Education and Sports, local governments, and other NGOs is essential to avoid duplication and ensure alignment with national standards.
Sustainability: From the start, plans are made for the school’s financial and operational future (e.g., through SMCs and community projects), ensuring the NGO’s exit does not lead to collapse.
Focus on the Most Marginalized: Targeting remote, rural, or conflict-affected communities where the need is greatest and government services are weakest.
In essence, this theory of change posits that a physical school building is the critical catalyst, but lasting change is only achieved when it is activated by empowered teachers, a supportive community, and a functional system.
This model is often called “Farm to School” or “School Gardens for Nutrition.”
Executive Summary
This Theory of Change outlines a pathway for improving child nutrition and educational outcomes by directly linking school food programs with local, sustainable farming practices. The core hypothesis is that by integrating hands-on agricultural education and providing fresh, locally sourced foods in school meals, we can shift children’s knowledge, preferences, and consumption towards healthier diets, leading to improved well-being and academic performance.
Individual level
Pastures of Hope International™ focuses on identifying key individuals within organizations and farming communities who can become change makers, developing their understanding, passion, and leadership and enabling them to attain our intended objective of feeding and growing food for schools: Community & School -Feeding Programme (CSFP)
Community level
Community-level intervention is the next step, and it is mostly carried out by these influential change agents who set an example for others to follow and inspire others with their passion. Partners concentrate on planning community-level events like food festivals, seed fairs, and discussions that have a broader impact and inspire additional community members to get involved. Eventually, communities of change makers will emerge that will inspire others.
The Pathway of Change (The "If-Then" Logic)
The Core Logic Chain
(The Long-Term Goal)
A generation of healthy, educated children who make informed food choices, contributing to vibrant local food systems, sustainable agricultural practices, and improved community well-being
Ultimate Impacts (5-10 Years)
- Improved Child Health & Nutrition: Reduced prevalence of diet-related diseases (e.g., childhood obesity, diabetes, anemia) and improved overall nutritional status among school-going children.
- Enhanced Educational Outcomes: Improved cognitive function, concentration, and school attendance, leading to better academic performance.
- Strengthened Local Food Systems: Increased economic viability for local smallholder farmers, a more resilient and diverse local food economy, and reduced environmental footprint of food procurement.
- Informed Food Citizens: Children who understand where food comes from, its nutritional value, and its environmental impact, and carry these values into adulthood.
Intermediate Outcomes (2-4 Years)
Changes in Student Behavior & Knowledge:
· Increased consumption of fruits and vegetables at school and at home.
· Improved nutritional knowledge and food literacy.
· Development of positive attitudes towards healthy and diverse foods.
· Development of practical gardening and cooking skills.
Changes in School Environment & Practices:
· School meals have higher nutritional quality, featuring more fresh, local, and culturally appropriate produce.
· School gardening and food education are integrated into the formal curriculum (e.g., science, math, and geography).
· A positive school food culture that celebrates healthy eating.
Changes in Farmer & Community Engagement:
· Local farmers have stable, predictable markets through school procurement.
· Parents and community members are engaged in school gardening and nutrition education.
· Increased community awareness of the links between farming, food, and health.
Outputs (Direct Results of Activities – 1-2 Years)
- School Gardens Established: Functional, productive gardens on school grounds.
- Local Food Procured: A percentage of school food budgets spent on local, fresh produce.
- Curriculum Developed & Taught: Lesson plans linking gardens and nutrition to core subjects.
- Training Delivered: Teachers trained in garden-based learning; cafeteria staff trained in preparing fresh produce; farmers trained in food safety and school procurement needs.
- Meals Served: School menus revised to incorporate fresh, local ingredients.
- Events Held: School farmers’ markets, harvest festivals, and cooking demonstrations.
Activities (What We Do)
On the Farming Side:
- Establish and maintain productive school gardens (horticulture, legumes, and fruits).
- Facilitate partnerships and contracts between schools and local farmers.
- Promote sustainable and climate-smart agricultural practices among supplier farmers.
On the Nutrition & Education Side:
- Develop and implement a food and nutrition education curriculum.
- Conduct hands-on cooking classes and tasting sessions (“Try It Tuesday”).
- Provide training for teachers and cafeteria staff.
On the System & Policy Side:
- Advocate for and develop supportive school food procurement policies.
- Engage parents and the community through volunteer programs and events.
- Establish a cross-functional School Food and Nutrition Committee.
Inputs (Resources Needed)
- Funding and In-Kind Support
- Land, Water, and Seeds for school gardens
- Partnerships (Schools, Farmers’ Cooperatives, NGOs, Government Ministries of Agriculture, Health, and Education)
- Expertise (Nutritionists, Agriculturists, Educators)
- Community Volunteers and Parental Involvement
- Political Will and Supportive Policy Frameworks
Assumptions
The school administration and teachers are supportive and willing to integrate the program.
There is basic infrastructure (e.g., access to water, secure land) for gardening.
Families and the community are open to participating.
Children’s food preferences can be positively influenced through repeated exposure and education.
Local farmers have the capacity (or can develop it) to meet the quality and quantity needs of the schools.
Risks and Mitigations Strategy
Seasonality of produce Plan menus around seasonal harvests; teach preservation techniques.
Lack of long-term funding Develop a sustainable business model; integrate costs into school/district budgets; diversify funders.
Teacher/staff turnover create simple, standardized guides and resources; institutionalize training.
Pesticide use or food safeties establish clear safety protocols and training for farmers and garden volunteers.
Lack of student interest Use engaging, child-centered activities and give students ownership of the garden.
Measurement & Evaluation (Key Indicators)
Input/output Level:
· Number of school gardens established.
· Dollar amount and percentage of food budget spent locally.
· Number of teachers trained.
Outcome Level:
· Knowledge & Attitude: Student surveys on food knowledge and preferences.
· Behavior: Plate waste studies; sales data from school bumper harvest; parent surveys on home consumption.
· Practice: School meal nutrient analysis; observation of curriculum implementation.
Impact Level:
· Student Body mass index (BMI) data (as one indicator among others).
· School attendance records.
· Academic grades in relevant subjects.
· Economic impact surveys of local farmers.
This Theory of Change provides a robust framework for planning, implementing, and evaluating a holistic program that connects the field to the fork, fostering a healthier future for children, communities, and the planet.
Executive Summary
The Theory of Change for a child sponsorship program posits that sustained, one-to-one financial and emotional support for a child, delivered through their family and community, creates a catalyst for breaking the cycle of poverty. It moves beyond individual charity to community-level development, enabling children to realize their potential as educated, healthy, and empowered adults.The pathway can be visualized as a chain of results:
INPUTS (What we invest)
ACTIVITIES (What we do)
OUTPUTS (Direct results)
OUTCOMES (Short & Medium-term changes)
IMPACT (Long-term goal)
1. Inputs
· Financial Contributions: Monthly donations from sponsors.
· Sponsor-Child Connection: Letters, photos/reports, and emotional support.
· Local Staff & Partners: Community-based organizations that implement the program.
· Program Infrastructure: Systems for fund management, monitoring, communication and evaluation.
2. Activities
· Disbursing Funds & Providing Services: Direct provision of school fees, uniforms, books, healthcare, nutritional support, and clean water.
· Facilitating Communication: Reporting and managing the exchange of letters between sponsors and children.
· Community Mobilization: Working with parents and community leaders to identify needs and co-design projects (e.g., building a school, wells, and health clinic).
· Training & Workshops: For parents on income-generation, and for children on life skills, rights, and protection.
3. Outputs (The Direct Deliverables)
· 450 number of children enrolled in and regularly attending school.
· 450 number of children receiving annual health check-ups.
· 1,350 number of letters exchanged between sponsors and children.
· 2 community infrastructure projects completed.
· 130 parents participating in vocational training.
The Pathway of Change: Outcomes to Impact. This is the crucial “how” and “why” of the theory.
The Pathway of Change: Outcomes to Impact. This is the crucial “how” and “why” of the theory.
4. Outcomes (The Changes That Occur)
Short-Term Outcomes (1-3 years):
· For the Child: Improved school performance, better health, and increased self-esteem from knowing someone cares about them.
· For the Family: Reduced financial burden for school and healthcare, allowing them to invest in other needs.
Medium-Term Outcomes (3-10 years):
· For the Child: Successful transition to secondary school or vocational training. Development of critical life skills and knowledge of their rights.
· For the Family: Increased household income due to parent training, leading to greater economic resilience.
· For the Community: Improved overall access to education and healthcare due to built infrastructure and strengthened systems.
5. The Long-Term Goal
· The sponsored child graduates from school or training as a healthy, skilled, and confident and responsible adult, capable of securing stable employment and breaking the cycle of poverty for themselves and their future family.
· The community becomes self-reliant, with sustainable systems in place for education, health, and economic development, no longer requiring external aid and for farmers, there is assured market for their farm product.
Key Assumptions (The “If” Statements)
The theory relies on several critical assumptions:
· If the sponsored funds are managed effectively and transparently.
· If the local partner organization is capable and trusted.
· If the child’s family and community are actively engaged.
· If the child remains in the program long enough to see sustained benefits.
· If the emotional connection with the sponsor genuinely contributes to the child’s well-being and motivation.
Critical Distinction: Individual vs. Community Focus
Modern understanding of this Theory of Change emphasizes that the sponsored child is often the entry point for community-wide development. While the individual child benefits directly, the program’s structure allows for investment in resources (schools, water points) that benefit everyone, creating a multiplier effect. The sponsor’s donation is not a simple cash transfer to the child’s family; it is pooled to fund a broader development strategy.
In summary, the Theory of Change for child sponsorship is a comprehensive model that links individual support to systemic community development, with the ultimate goal of creating lasting, generational change.
Summary of our theory of change
Here is a summary comparing and contrasting the three common development interventions: School Nutrition Programs, Child Sponsorship, and School Construction Projects.
This summary breaks down each project’s core objective, key activities, immediate outputs, intended outcomes, and overarching impact.
Comparative Summary Table | |||
Feature | School Nutrition Program | Child Sponsorship Program | School Construction Project |
Core Objective | To improve children’s immediate health and cognitive function to enhance learning capacity | To holistically address the barriers (poverty, health, social) that prevent a child from accessing a quality education and thriving | To provide a safe, accessible, and conducive physical environment for learning. |
Key Activities | Providing daily meals/snacks – Nutritional education – De-worming & micronutrient supplements | Covering school costs (fees, uniforms) – Providing health check-ups – Facilitating sponsor-child communication – Community development (wells, parent training) | Building/renovating classrooms, libraries, latrines – Providing furniture & learning materials– Training school management committees |
Immediate Outputs | children fed daily – in short term, reduction of hunger | – children enrolled in school – children receiving healthcare – letters exchanged | – new classrooms built —latrines constructed – School enrollment capacity increased |
Short-Term Outcomes | – Improved concentration in class Reduced absenteeism due to hunger – Better health | – Improved school attendance & performance – Improved child health & self-esteem – Reduced financial strain on family | – Reduced overcrowding of classrooms – Improved student retention – Safer, more gender-inclusive facilities (e.g., separate latrines) |
Long-Term Impact | – Improved educational attainment– Better long-term health & economic prospects | – Child breaks cycle of poverty -Community becomes self-reliant with strengthened systems in place | – Higher quality of education system-wide – Increased community literacy rates – Sustainable public infrastructure |
Detailed Breakdown of Each Project
1. School Nutrition Program
· Theory of Change: By addressing the immediate biological barrier of hunger and malnutrition, children are better able to concentrate, learn, and thrive in school. It’s a direct investment in a child’s “learning hardware.”
· Focus: Direct, immediate, and universal for the targeted school. It addresses a fundamental prerequisite for learning.
· Key Advantage: Can show rapid improvements in attendance and concentration. Often serves as a powerful incentive for families to send their children to school.
2. Child Sponsorship Program
· Theory of Change: Sustained, holistic support for a child (the “entry point”), delivered through their family and community, removes multiple, interconnected barriers to their development, enabling them to become empowered adults.
· Focus: Holistic and individual-centered, with community ripple effects. It combines direct aid (for the child) with systemic development (for the community).
· Key Advantage: Addresses the multi-dimensional nature of poverty (financial, social, health and literacy). The sponsor connection provides emotional support and a global perspective.
3. School Construction Project
· Theory of Change: A safe, functional, and accessible learning environment is a foundational requirement for a quality education. Without proper infrastructure, learning is severely hindered.
· Focus: Systemic, infrastructural, and long-lasting. It creates a public good that benefits entire communities for generations.
· Key Advantage: Creates a tangible, sustainable asset. Directly tackles issues of overcrowding, long travel distances, and lack of basic facilities, which are major barriers to education, especially for girls.
How They Work Together
These three interventions are not mutually exclusive; in fact, they are highly complementary and often form the core of a comprehensive education strategy:
1. A School Construction Project provides the physical foundation for learning.
2. A School Nutrition Program ensures the children inside that building are healthy and ready to learn.
3. A Child Sponsorship Program provides the wraparound support that addresses the underlying poverty that could otherwise prevent a child from ever reaching the school gate.
In practice, a robust Child Sponsorship program will often fund and integrate School Nutrition Programs and School Construction Projects as part of its community-level development work.