Salta al menu principale di navigazione Salta al contenuto principale Salta al piè di pagina del sito
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Saggi

N. 94 (2026)

La teoria del cambiamento in pratica: riflessioni e adattamenti dalla valutazione del progetto CoMix

  • Giuliana Parente
  • Glenda Cinotti
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/Riv2026oa22394
Inviata
7 aprile 2026
Pubblicato
28-04-2026

Abstract

This contribution offers a reflection on the practical use of the Theory of Change (ToC) through the analysis of a case study. The case examined concerns the evaluation of the CoMix project, funded by the Social Innovation Fund (SIF), which includes co-housing initiatives targeting vulnerable groups – young people with disabilities and NEET youth – as well as the activation of multifunctional hubs aimed at bringing public administration closer to peripheral urban areas and fostering processes of social and labour inclusion and community engagement across Tuscan territories. The evaluation of the project provides an opportunity to reflect on the role of the ToC in evaluation practice, highlighting both its flexibility and its practical limitations. In particular, the case shows how the ToC, although widely adopted in evaluation practice, may lead to unsatisfactory outcomes when it remains anchored to the initial assumptions about how an intervention is expected to work and is not adequately adapted to changes in context and in the evaluation process. 

Riferimenti bibliografici

  1. Auspos, P., Kubisch, A. (2004). Building knowledge about community change: Moving beyond evaluations. Aspen Institute.
  2. Bemme, D. (2019). Finding “what works”: Theory of change, contingent universals, and virtuous failure in global mental health. Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry, 43(3), 574–595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11013-019 09637-6
  3. Blamey, A., Mackenzie, M. (2007). Theories of change and realistic evaluation: Peas in a pod or apples and oranges? Evaluation, 13(4), 439–455. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389007082129
  4. Breuer, E., Lee, L., De Silva, M., Lund, C. (2016). Using theory of change to design and evaluate public health interventions: A systematic review. Implementation Science, 11, Article 63. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0422-6
  5. Center for Theory of Change. (n.d.). How does theory of change work? Theory of Change Community. https://www.theoryofchange.org/what-is-the-theory-of-change/how-does-theory-ofchange-work/
  6. Chen, H.T. (1990). Theory-driven evaluations. Sage.
  7. Chen, H.T., Rossi, P.H. (1983). Evaluating with sense: The theory-driven approach. Evaluation Review, 7(3), 283–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841X8300700301
  8. Connell, J. P., Kubisch, A.C. (1998). L’approccio della Teoria del Cambiamento applicato alla valutazione delle iniziative integrate di comunità: Stato dell’arte, prospettive e problemi. In N. Stame (Ed.), I classici della valutazione (2007). FrancoAngeli.
  9. Connell, J. P., Kubisch, A.C. (1998). Applying a theory of change approach to the evaluation of comprehensive community initiatives: Progress, prospects, and problems. In K., Fulbright-Anderson, A., Kubisch, J. P., Connell (Eds.), New approaches to evaluating community initiatives (Vol. 2, pp. 1–13). Aspen Institute.
  10. Da e per le persone con disabilità. (2022). Progetto di social housing per persone con gravi disabilità motorie. https://agendadelladisabilita.it/abitare-sociale-social-housing-orbassano/
  11. Fantini, L. (2024). La Teoria del Cambiamento: Origini, misunderstanding e misuse ed elementi innovativi. RIV – Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione, 90, 9–23.
  12. Fulbright-Anderson, K., Kubisch, A.C., Connell, J.P. (Eds.) (1998). New approaches to evaluating community initiatives (Vol. 2). Aspen Institute.
  13. Lindgren, L. (2001). The non-profit sector meets the performance-management movement. Evaluation, 7(3), 285–392.
  14. L’Oasi. (2018). Progetto di cohousing per valorizzare l’autonomia di persone con disabilità. https://www.aiasbo.it/oasi/
  15. Pawson, R., Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. Sage.
  16. Rossi, P.H., Freeman, H.E., Lipsey, M.W. (2007). Costruire le valutazioni su misura. In N. Stame (Ed.), I classici della valutazione. FrancoAngeli.
  17. Stame, N. (2004). Theory-based evaluation and types of complexity. Evaluation, 10(1), 58–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389004043135
  18. Stame, N. (2016). Valutazione pluralista. FrancoAngeli.
  19. Stame, N. (2024). La ToC è la Teoria del Cambiamento. Ma che cos’è il cambiamento? RIV – Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione, 87, 130–150. DOI 10.3280/RIV2023-087008
  20. Tummers, L. (2015). Understanding co-housing from a planning perspective: why and how? Urban Research & Practice, 8(1), 64–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2015.1011427.
  21. Tummers, L. (2016). The re-emergence of self-managed co-housing in Europe: A critical review of co-housing research. Urban Studies, 53(10), 2023–2040. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26151181
  22. Tummers, L. (2017). Learning from co-housing initiatives (Doctoral dissertation, TU Delft). Delft University of Technology.
  23. Valters, C. (2014). Theories of change in international development: Communication, learning, or accountability? (JSRP Paper No. 17). Justice and Security Research Programme & The Asia Foundation.
  24. Village Vertical. (2005). Village vertical, Villeurbanne: Progetto di social housing. https://atlas.affordablehousingactivation.org/ficha/village-vertical-villeurbanne-francia/
  25. Weiss, C.H. (1977). The enlightenment function of social research. Policy Analysis, 3(4), 531– 545.
  26. Weiss, C.H. (1995). Nothing as practical as good theory: Exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive community-based initiatives for children and families. In J.P. Connell, A.C. Kubisch, L. B. Schorr, C.H. Weiss (Eds.), New approaches to evaluating community initiatives (Vol. 1, pp. 65–92). Aspen Institute.
  27. Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation: Methods for studying programs and policies. Prentice Hall.