Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted participatory evaluation processes, forcing evaluators to adapt methodologies traditionally reliant on in-person interaction. Theory of Change (ToC) workshops—valued for fostering collaboration, surfacing assumptions, and building shared programme logic—were particularly affected. Aim: This study examined how ToC workshops were adapted to virtual platforms under crisis conditions, asking what was gained and what was lost when participatory, dialogical processes moved online. Method: Six ToC workshops with South African education NGOs and partners were analysed: four conducted in person (2018–2019) and two facilitated virtually during the 2020–2021 lockdowns. A reflective comparative approach was employed, drawing on facilitator notes, participant feedback, and workshop artefacts to assess participation, inclusivity, facilitation strategies, and quality of outputs. Results: Virtual workshops sustained continuity, widened geographic reach, and enhanced documentation through recordings, shared diagrams, and chat transcripts. However, they constrained spontaneity, relational depth, and inclusivity. Connectivity barriers and uneven digital literacy advantaged urban and younger participants, while rural and less digitally fluent stakeholders were marginalised. Outputs were structurally coherent but often thinner in assumptions, risks, and intermediate outcomes compared to in-person workshops. Recommendations: Hybrid models are proposed as a resilient pathway: virtual workshops for preparatory and follow-up sessions, complemented by in-person or high-bandwidth engagements for deep relational dialogue. Practical supports should include data stipends, low-bandwidth tools, digital literacy training, asynchronous participation channels, and co-facilitation teams with technical support. Conclusion and Contribution: The study shows that modality is not neutral—it redistributes voice and reshapes the epistemic content of ToCs. By documenting both constraints and innovations, it contributes to debates on participatory evaluation under disruption and offers practical guidance for evaluators, NGOs, and funders designing equitable hybrid facilitation models.