Big Local Theory of Change: Summary

Copy link Copy this page link

What am I looking at?

A Theory of Change is a representation of an intervention, policy or programme that shows how activities lead to outcomes. They are often created at the beginning of a programme, to guide evaluation frameworks. As the Big Local programme was a new approach in resident-led change and considered experimental, this Theory of Change wasn't created until the programme was almost complete and is based on a systematic review of the qualitative evidence available on this website. You can learn more about how Local Trust's research was conducted, and how this Theory of Change was created, in an article about Local Trust's approach to research.

It is presented as linear as it is a representation of what happened in all 150 areas, over the course of 10-15 years. However, not all areas did everything that is featured in the Theory of Change. The linear lines of activities and outcomes did not happen in neat succession, and many activities and outcomes feed into others. Not all areas completed the programme through the Big Local resident-led decision-making model, but 95% did. The Big Local Theory of Change represents an idealised version of the activities and outcomes involved in Big Local, while the risks capture what hinders this and represent where Big Local activities were less successful. While no model can be complete and correct, this one is intended to be useful in designing future resident-led programmes and summarising the learning from Big Local.

This is a summary of the Theory of Change - the detailed Theory of Change, which includes context, challenges and enablers, is available on another page. A narrative version is also available in an article.

Please note the following key terms from the Big Local programme are used throughout the Theory of Change.

Close all Open all
Over £1 million funding per area
Long-term, flexible, non-prescriptive approach
Big Local values - resident-led, patient, non-judgmental
Big Local partnership’s time, willingness and interest
Community needs, priorities and skills
Locally Trusted Organisation (LTO)
Local Trust’s support offer
Local assets and organisations
Having these inputs in place meant Big Local partnerships could deliver early activities
Engage the community
Make decisions and plans
Access training and support
Build relationships within partnership and with LTO
Find and use community spaces
Deliver or fund first projects
Collaborate with others
Employ paid workers
These early activities led to the building blocks for area-specific project activities
Residents feeling listened to
Partnership building skills and confidence
Partnership becoming a team and working through conflict
More residents getting involved in decisions
Partnership engaging with Local Trust support
Partnership becoming part of local services
Partnership accessing other funding and support
The project activities varied across areas according to community priorities - not all areas did all these activities
Investment in physical assets and local environment
Local activities and services e.g. health, employment, events, food
Responding to crisis locally
Volunteering opportunities
Grant-giving to support new ideas
Advocating for the community e.g. in local regeneration
Convening collaborative networks e.g. residents, VCS and health providers
The project activities which communities focused on led to project relevant outcomes

For residents:

Increased access to community spaces
Essential needs are better met
Improved knowledge of where to access support
More support for local priorities e.g. employment, health
More opportunities to come together
Resident voice better represented in local services/development

For resident leaders:

Partnership build further skills and confidence
Collaboration makes local resource go further
Increase in volunteering
Volunteers build skills and confidence
New projects and groups trialled and established
Over time these contibuted to long-term outcomes, which varied according to what communities chose to focus on
Increased use of local spaces
Increased trust in Big Local
More residents access support
Community more socially connected
Increased sense of pride and belonging
Increased sense of safety
Improved wellbeing
Local groups are better connected
Community better able to identify and respond to local need
Which ultimately contributes towards potential long-term impact, also varied by what happened in each area
More funds brought into the area
More community leaders and volunteers
Projects/assets become sustainable long-term
More residents in decision-making roles
More and better connected services
Resident leaders have increased skills to identify and meet local need
More resident needs are better met
Community is more resilient to crisis