Back to Details

toc-builder

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Theory of Change Builder

变革理论构建工具

A ToC is not a logic model with arrows. It is an argument about how change happens, with the assumptions made visible and testable. This skill enforces that standard.
ToC并非带箭头的逻辑模型，而是关于变革如何发生的论证，其中所有假设都清晰可见且可验证。本技能严格遵循这一标准。

When to use

使用场景

Trigger for theory-of-change work: new programme design, ToC revision, pathway analysis, programme logic review, funder-required ToC submissions, or ToC critique.
Do not trigger for routine results frameworks, logframes, or indicator lists — those are downstream of the ToC.
触发变革理论相关工作的场景：新项目设计、ToC修订、路径分析、项目逻辑审核、资助方要求提交的ToC、或ToC评审。
请勿在常规成果框架、逻辑框架或指标列表场景下触发——这些都是ToC的下游产物。

Required inputs

必要输入

Ask in one batch. Do not start drafting without the first four.
  1. Long-term outcome or vision: the change Ane wants the programme to contribute to, stated in language the target population would recognise (required)
  2. Target population and context: who, where, what constraints shape their lives (required)
  3. Programme scope: what interventions the programme can actually deliver (required)
  4. Timeframe: short (12 mo), medium (3 yr), long (5-10 yr) markers (required)
  5. Existing analysis: prior ToC, needs assessment, or evaluation findings (optional)
  6. Feminist political economy analysis: who holds power in this system, how gender and other axes shape access (optional but required for SRHR; will prompt if missing)
一次性收集所有必要信息。缺少前四项时不要开始起草。
  1. 长期成果或愿景：项目希望促成的变革，需用目标群体能理解的语言表述（必填）
  2. 目标群体与背景：对象是谁、所在地、哪些约束条件影响他们的生活（必填）
  3. 项目范围：项目实际可开展的干预措施（必填）
  4. 时间框架：短期（12个月）、中期（3年）、长期（5-10年）节点（必填）
  5. 现有分析：过往ToC、需求评估或评估结果（可选）
  6. 女性主义政治经济学分析：系统中谁掌握权力，性别及其他维度如何影响获取资源的机会（可选，但SRHR项目必填；若缺失将提示补充）

Method

方法

Work backward from the long-term outcome. Never forward from activities.
从长期成果倒推，绝不能从活动顺推。

Step 1 — articulate the vision

步骤1 — 明确愿景

Write the long-term outcome as one sentence. Must be specific enough to be falsifiable. "Improved SRHR outcomes" fails. "Adolescent girls in [region] access quality contraception within 30 minutes' travel, without third-party consent" passes.
将长期成果写成一句话。必须具体到可证伪的程度。“改善SRHR成果”不符合要求。“[某地区]的青春期女孩能在30分钟行程内获取优质避孕服务，无需第三方同意”符合要求。

Step 2 — identify preconditions

步骤2 — 识别前提条件

What must be true for the long-term outcome to hold? List preconditions at medium-term and short-term horizons. Each precondition is itself a change state, not an activity.
要实现长期成果，必须满足哪些条件？列出中期和短期的前提条件。每个前提条件本身是一种变革状态，而非一项活动。

Step 3 — surface the causal links

步骤3 — 梳理因果关联

For every link between preconditions, name:
  • Causal claim: why does A lead to B in this context?
  • Assumption: what must be true, outside the programme's control, for A to actually lead to B?
  • Evidence status: tested (cite the source), plausible (cite the framework), or untested (flag for evidence gap)
针对每一组前提条件之间的关联，明确：
  • 因果主张：在该背景下，为什么A会导致B？
  • 假设：在项目控制范围之外，必须满足什么条件，A才能真正导致B？
  • 证据状态：已验证（注明来源）、合理（注明框架）或未验证（标记为证据缺口）

Step 4 — apply the feminist political economy lens

步骤4 — 应用女性主义政治经济学视角

Do not skip this, even if the programme is not labelled SRHR. For each node:
  • Whose interests does this change serve? Whose interests does it threaten?
  • What power relations must shift for this change to stick?
  • Which voices defined this outcome? Who was consulted? Who co-designed?
If these questions cannot be answered, mark the precondition with 
⚠️ Feminist political economy analysis missing
.
即使项目未标注为SRHR，也不可跳过此步骤。针对每个节点：
  • 该变革服务于谁的利益？威胁到谁的利益？
  • 要让变革持续，必须转变哪些权力关系？
  • 该成果由哪些群体的声音定义？咨询了谁？谁参与了共同设计？
若无法回答这些问题，需在该前提条件旁标记
⚠️ 缺失女性主义政治经济学分析
。

Step 5 — identify threats to the ToC

步骤5 — 识别ToC面临的威胁

From Mayne (2019): what alternative explanations would account for the expected change if the programme were not running? What other contributions are likely? Name them.
参考Mayne（2019）：如果项目未实施，哪些替代解释可以说明预期的变革？可能还有哪些其他促成因素？列出这些内容。

Step 6 — define the contribution question

步骤6 — 定义贡献问题

State the evaluative question the ToC must eventually answer. Follow Mayne (2019) phrasing: "To what extent and in what ways did the programme contribute to [outcome], given other contributions and context?"
明确ToC最终需要回答的评估问题。遵循Mayne（2019）的表述方式：“考虑到其他贡献因素和背景，项目在多大程度上、以何种方式促成了[成果]？”

Step 7 — plan the evidence

步骤7 — 规划证据

For each assumption, name:
  • What would confirm it?
  • What would disconfirm it?
  • What data source could provide that evidence?
  • When will the ToC be revisited in light of the evidence?
针对每个假设，明确：
  • 什么可以证实该假设？
  • 什么可以推翻该假设？
  • 哪些数据源可以提供相关证据？
  • 何时会根据证据重新审视ToC？

Output structure

输出结构

Produce a ToC document with these sections under these H2s:
  1. Vision — one sentence, as described in Step 1
  2. Context and population — two paragraphs max
  3. Pathway diagram — text representation: each precondition as a node, each link described in one sentence. If the user needs a visual, produce Mermaid source.
  4. Preconditions by horizon — three columns (short / medium / long), each precondition one line
  5. Causal claims and assumptions — table: From → To, Causal claim, Assumption, Evidence status
  6. Feminist political economy analysis — per-node power and participation notes
  7. Threats to the ToC — rival explanations and other contributions
  8. Contribution question — one sentence
  9. Evidence plan — table: Assumption, Confirming evidence, Disconfirming evidence, Data source, Revisit date
  10. Data gaps — 
    ⚠️ Data gap:
    entries for anything missing
生成包含以下H2章节的ToC文档：
  1. 愿景 — 一句话，符合步骤1的要求
  2. 背景与目标群体 — 最多两段
  3. 路径图 — 文本表示：每个前提条件作为一个节点，每个关联用一句话描述。若用户需要可视化内容，生成Mermaid source。
  4. 按时间节点划分的前提条件 — 三列（短期/中期/长期），每个前提条件占一行
  5. 因果主张与假设 — 表格：从→到、因果主张、假设、证据状态
  6. 女性主义政治经济学分析 — 每个节点的权力与参与说明
  7. ToC面临的威胁 — 替代解释与其他促成因素
  8. 贡献问题 — 一句话
  9. 证据计划 — 表格：假设、证实证据、推翻证据、数据源、重新审视日期
  10. 数据缺口 — 
    ⚠️ 数据缺口:
    条目，列出所有缺失内容

Citation requirements

引用要求

Every framework claim cites author and year. Mandatory versions:
  • Vogel (2012) "Review of the Use of 'Theory of Change' in International Development" (DFID)
  • van Eerdewijk et al. (2017) "White Paper: A Conceptual Model of Women and Girls' Empowerment" (KIT)
  • Mayne (2019) "Revisiting the Contribution Question" Evaluation 25(3)
  • Cornwall & Rivas (2015) for feminist framing when relevant
所有框架主张需注明作者及年份。必须引用的版本：
  • Vogel (2012) 《Review of the Use of 'Theory of Change' in International Development》（DFID）
  • van Eerdewijk et al. (2017) 《White Paper: A Conceptual Model of Women and Girls' Empowerment》（KIT）
  • Mayne (2019) 《Revisiting the Contribution Question》 Evaluation 25(3)
  • 相关情况下，引用Cornwall & Rivas (2015) 的女性主义框架

Writing rules

写作规则

Follow CLAUDE.md house style. No hedging in causal claims — if the claim is uncertain, state that the evidence is untested. No logical leaps — if Step 3 cannot name the causal mechanism, mark the link as 
⚠️ Untested mechanism
.
遵循CLAUDE.md的内部风格。因果主张不可含糊——若主张不确定，需说明证据未验证。不可出现逻辑跳跃——若步骤3无法明确因果机制，需将该关联标记为
⚠️ 未验证机制
。

Limitations

局限性

This skill does not generate indicators. Route to 
indicator-designer
after the ToC is stable. It does not replace stakeholder consultation — it structures the analysis Ane brings from that consultation.
本技能不生成指标。ToC确定后，可转至
indicator-designer
。本技能无法替代利益相关方咨询——它只是对Ane从咨询中获取的分析进行结构化处理。