{"id":10371,"date":"2026-10-05T17:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-10-05T13:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/matsh.co\/en\/?post_type=course&#038;p=10371"},"modified":"2026-10-05T01:30:03","modified_gmt":"2026-10-04T21:30:03","slug":"theory-of-change-logical-framework-design-course","status":"publish","type":"course","link":"https:\/\/matsh.co\/en\/course\/theory-of-change-logical-framework-design-course\/","title":{"rendered":"Theory of Change and Logical Framework Design Course"},"content":{"rendered":"\n.toc-hook{background:#f8fafc;border:1.5px solid #d0dce8;border-radius:16px;padding:36px 40px;margin-bottom:32px}.toc-hook p{font-size:1rem;color:#2d3a4a;line-height:1.85;margin:0 0 20px}.toc-stats{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;gap:14px;margin-top:24px}.toc-stat{background:#fff;border:1.5px solid #d0dce8;border-radius:12px;padding:16px 20px;flex:1;min-width:150px;text-align:center}.toc-stat strong{display:block;font-size:1.42rem;font-weight:800;color:#2f7e73;line-height:1.2}.toc-stat span{font-size:.75rem;color:#5a6a7e;line-height:1.5;display:block;margin-top:5px}.toc-source{font-size:.72rem!important;color:#6b7788!important;margin:16px 0 0!important}.toc-pain{background:#f1faf8;border-left:5px solid #2f7e73;border-radius:0 14px 14px 0;padding:30px 34px;margin-bottom:44px}.toc-pain ul{margin:12px 0 0;padding-left:20px;line-height:2.05;color:#173e39}.toc-h{font-size:1.45rem;font-weight:800;color:#173e39;border-bottom:3px solid #2f7e73;padding-bottom:10px;margin:44px 0 24px}.toc-cards,.toc-regions{display:grid;grid-template-columns:repeat(auto-fit,minmax(230px,1fr));gap:18px;margin-bottom:44px}.toc-card,.toc-region{border:1.5px solid #b8ddd7;border-radius:14px;padding:22px 20px;background:#fff}.toc-card h4,.toc-region h4{margin:8px 0;color:#173e39;font-size:.95rem;font-weight:700}.toc-card p,.toc-region p{margin:0;font-size:.84rem;color:#3a5578;line-height:1.65}.toc-gains{background:#f1faf8;border-radius:16px;padding:36px;margin-bottom:44px}.toc-gg{display:grid;grid-template-columns:repeat(auto-fit,minmax(240px,1fr));gap:14px}.toc-g{background:#fff;border-radius:10px;padding:16px 20px;display:flex;gap:12px;align-items:flex-start;font-size:.88rem;line-height:1.65;color:#2d3a4a}.toc-g i{color:#2f7e73;font-size:1.25rem;flex-shrink:0;font-style:normal}.toc-m{border:1.5px solid #b8ddd7;border-radius:14px;overflow:hidden;margin-bottom:16px}.toc-mh{background:#173e39;color:#fff;padding:16px 24px;display:flex;align-items:center;gap:16px}.toc-mn{background:#2f7e73;width:38px;height:38px;border-radius:50%;display:flex;align-items:center;justify-content:center;font-weight:800;flex-shrink:0}.toc-mb{padding:22px 26px}.toc-mb p{margin:0 0 14px;color:#444f5e;line-height:1.8;font-size:.93rem}.toc-mb ul{margin:0;padding-left:20px;color:#444f5e;line-height:1.95;font-size:.9rem}.toc-work{margin:14px 0 0!important;padding:12px 16px;background:#f1faf8;border-radius:8px;color:#173e39!important;font-weight:600}.toc-faq{border-bottom:1px solid #b8ddd7;padding:18px 0}.toc-faq b{display:block;color:#173e39;margin-bottom:8px;font-size:.95rem}.toc-faq span{color:#3a5578;font-size:.88rem;line-height:1.75}.toc-rel{display:grid;grid-template-columns:repeat(auto-fit,minmax(220px,1fr));gap:14px;margin-bottom:44px}.toc-rel a{border:1.5px solid #b8ddd7;border-radius:10px;padding:16px 18px;text-decoration:none;color:#173e39;font-weight:600;font-size:.88rem}.toc-cta{background:linear-gradient(135deg,#2f7e73,#173e39);border-radius:16px;padding:44px;text-align:center;color:#fff;margin-top:44px}.toc-cta h3{font-size:1.5rem;font-weight:800;margin:0 0 12px;color:#fff}.toc-cta p{opacity:.9;margin:0 0 28px;font-size:.97rem;line-height:1.7;color:#fff}.toc-tbl{width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;font-size:.9rem}.toc-tbl td{padding:14px 24px;border-bottom:1px solid #b8ddd7}\n<div class=\"toc-hook\"><h2 style=\"font-size:clamp(1.15rem,2.5vw,1.5rem);font-weight:800;color:#1a2535;line-height:1.25;margin:0 0 14px\">If the Programme Logic Is Weak, Better Indicators Will Only Measure the Confusion More Precisely.<\/h2><p>Development programmes often move too quickly from problem statement to activity list.<\/p><p>Train 500 people. Establish ten centres. Run an awareness campaign. Create a referral pathway. Produce a policy toolkit.<\/p><p>Those may all be reasonable activities, but none explains why the activity should produce the desired change, which conditions must hold for the change to happen, what other actors matter, where the causal chain can break, or what evidence supports the underlying assumptions.<\/p><p>OECD describes the results chain as the causal sequence connecting inputs and activities through outputs and outcomes to impact, with the relationships between the elements as important as the elements themselves. BetterEvaluation similarly treats theory of change as an explanation of how an intervention is expected to contribute to change in a particular context, including assumptions and external factors.<\/p><p>This course teaches participants to make that logic explicit, challenge it before implementation, convert it into a usable results framework and build monitoring around the parts of the theory that matter most.<\/p><div class=\"toc-stats\"><div class=\"toc-stat\"><strong>Inputs \u2192 activities \u2192 outputs \u2192 outcomes \u2192 impact*<em>  \nOECD describes results chains as causal sequences linking what a programme does with the changes it expects to contribute to.  \n<\/em>Source: OECD.*<\/strong><span><strong>Assumptions + risks<\/strong>   A rigorous Theory of Change makes the assumptions, contextual conditions and risks between results explicit rather than leaving them hidden.<\/span><\/div><div class=\"toc-stat\"><strong>Design + M&amp;E*<em>  \nTheory of Change can support programme design, monitoring, evaluation and the review of evidence gaps.  \n<\/em>Source: BetterEvaluation.*<\/strong><span><\/span><\/div><\/div><p class=\"toc-source\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.betterevaluation.org\/frameworks-guides\/rainbow-framework\/define\/develop-programme-theory-theory-change\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">BetterEvaluation Theory of Change<\/a> \u00b7 <a href=\"https:\/\/www.oecd.org\/en\/publications\/monitoring-and-evaluation-of-child-and-youth-policies-and-outcomes-in-ireland_2bd86a9d-en\/full-report\/component-5.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">OECD Results Chain<\/a> \u00b7 <a href=\"https:\/\/www.oecd.org\/en\/publications\/effective-results-frameworks-for-sustainable-development_aaa4bb52-en\/full-report\/component-9.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">OECD Results Frameworks<\/a>. Evidence is used for context, not as a guarantee of participant or employer outcomes.<\/p><\/div><div class=\"toc-pain\"><p style=\"font-weight:700;font-size:1.05rem;margin:0;color:#173e39\">Programme logic becomes weak when:<\/p><ul><li>teams start with activities before agreeing the specific change they want to create<\/li><li>outputs are written as though they automatically produce outcomes<\/li><li>logframes contain indicators but no convincing causal logic<\/li><li>assumptions are generic statements rather than conditions that can break the pathway<\/li><li>stakeholder behaviour is treated as predictable even where the programme depends on adoption or institutional change<\/li><li>context, policy, incentives and other interventions are ignored<\/li><li>a theory-of-change diagram becomes a presentation graphic rather than a working management tool<\/li><li>programme teams confuse attribution with contribution<\/li><li>indicators are selected before the result statements are clear<\/li><li>proposals, workplans and M&amp;E frameworks describe slightly different versions of the programme<\/li><li>the theory is never revisited even when implementation evidence shows the original assumptions were wrong.<\/li><\/ul><\/div><h2 class=\"toc-h\">How This Applies Across the Markets MATSH Serves<\/h2><div class=\"toc-regions\"><div class=\"toc-region\"><h4>GCC<\/h4><p>Applications include government transformation, youth and workforce programmes, social-development initiatives, foundation funding and multi-agency programmes where institutional change and stakeholder coordination need to be made explicit.<\/p><\/div><div class=\"toc-region\"><h4>Africa<\/h4><p>The course is particularly relevant to donor-funded, civil-society, humanitarian and public-sector programmes operating in complex contexts where external factors, partner roles and locally held assumptions strongly shape results.<\/p><\/div><div class=\"toc-region\"><h4>Asia<\/h4><p>Participants can apply the methods to large multi-stakeholder development programmes, education and health interventions, policy reform and programmes operating across different geographic or institutional contexts.<\/p><\/div><div class=\"toc-region\"><h4>Europe<\/h4><p>Applications include policy programmes, EU-funded initiatives, social innovation and evidence-heavy programme environments requiring clear intervention logic, results frameworks and defensible indicator design.  These are contextual lenses, not assumptions that every programme in a region follows the same model.<\/p><\/div><\/div><h2 class=\"toc-h\">Who Should Attend<\/h2><div class=\"toc-cards\"><div class=\"toc-card\"><div style=\"font-size:1.8rem\">\ud83e\udded<\/div><h4>Programme and Project Managers<\/h4><p>Designing or revising interventions and needing a clearer explanation of how activities are expected to create outcomes.<\/p><\/div><div class=\"toc-card\"><div style=\"font-size:1.8rem\">\ud83d\udcca<\/div><h4>M&amp;E \/ MEAL Professionals<\/h4><p>Responsible for turning programme logic into indicators, learning questions and evaluation design.<\/p><\/div><div class=\"toc-card\"><div style=\"font-size:1.8rem\">\ud83d\udc54<\/div><h4>Grant and Proposal Teams<\/h4><p>Building credible results frameworks and logframes for institutional donors.<\/p><\/div><div class=\"toc-card\"><div style=\"font-size:1.8rem\">\ud83c\udfaf<\/div><h4>Policy and Strategy Professionals<\/h4><p>Designing interventions where behaviour, institutions and external conditions affect results.<\/p><\/div><div class=\"toc-card\"><div style=\"font-size:1.8rem\">\ud83c\udfe2<\/div><h4>NGO and Civil Society Leaders<\/h4><p>Needing a shared programme logic across teams, partners and funders.<\/p><\/div><div class=\"toc-card\"><div style=\"font-size:1.8rem\">\ud83e\udd1d<\/div><h4>Consultants and Facilitators<\/h4><p>Leading programme-design workshops, theory-of-change sessions or results-framework development.<\/p><\/div><\/div><div class=\"toc-gains\"><h2 style=\"font-size:1.45rem;font-weight:800;color:#173e39;margin:0 0 6px\">What You Will Leave With<\/h2><p style=\"color:#3a5578;margin:0 0 24px;font-size:.95rem\">A complete programme-logic package for a real or realistic intervention.<\/p><div class=\"toc-gg\"><div class=\"toc-g\"><i>\u2713<\/i><span><strong>A problem and context analysis<\/strong>, separating symptoms, causes and external conditions.<\/span><\/div><div class=\"toc-g\"><i>\u2713<\/i><span><strong>A results chain<\/strong>, connecting activities, outputs, outcomes and impact.<\/span><\/div><div class=\"toc-g\"><i>\u2713<\/i><span><strong>Explicit causal assumptions<\/strong>, showing what must be true between each major result.<\/span><\/div><div class=\"toc-g\"><i>\u2713<\/i><span><strong>A risk and external-factor map<\/strong>, identifying where programme influence is limited.<\/span><\/div><div class=\"toc-g\"><i>\u2713<\/i><span><strong>A Theory of Change narrative<\/strong>, explaining how and why the intervention is expected to work.<\/span><\/div><div class=\"toc-g\"><i>\u2713<\/i><span><strong>A visual ToC<\/strong>, designed for discussion rather than decoration.<\/span><\/div><div class=\"toc-g\"><i>\u2713<\/i><span><strong>A logical\/results framework<\/strong>, linking results with indicators, baselines, targets and verification.<\/span><\/div><div class=\"toc-g\"><i>\u2713<\/i><span><strong>An indicator set<\/strong>, built after the results logic rather than before it.<\/span><\/div><div class=\"toc-g\"><i>\u2713<\/i><span><strong>A validation and learning plan<\/strong>, showing how implementation evidence will test and refine the theory.<\/span><\/div><\/div><\/div><h2 class=\"toc-h\">Programme Curriculum<\/h2><div class=\"toc-m\"><div class=\"toc-mh\"><div class=\"toc-mn\">1<\/div><strong>Situation Analysis, Problem Framing and Desired Change<\/strong><\/div><div class=\"toc-mb\"><p><strong>Why this module matters:<\/strong> A Theory of Change built on a poorly framed problem only creates a more sophisticated explanation of the wrong issue.  Participants learn to:<\/p><ul><li>distinguish symptoms from underlying causes<\/li><li>define the population, geography and institutional context precisely<\/li><li>use problem trees and causal analysis without treating them as mechanical templates<\/li><li>identify who experiences the problem and who influences it<\/li><li>map relevant policy, market, social and institutional factors<\/li><li>recognise where existing interventions already affect the system<\/li><li>define the long-term change the programme intends to contribute to<\/li><li>distinguish impact ambition from what one programme can realistically influence<\/li><li>identify evidence gaps in the situation analysis<\/li><li>write a focused design challenge before proposing activities.<\/li><\/ul><p class=\"toc-work\"><strong>Workshop:<\/strong> Build a problem\/context map and desired-impact statement.<\/p><\/div><\/div><div class=\"toc-m\"><div class=\"toc-mh\"><div class=\"toc-mn\">2<\/div><strong>Results Chains and Causal Pathways<\/strong><\/div><div class=\"toc-mb\"><p><strong>Why this module matters:<\/strong> Activities do not become outcomes simply because they appear in the same proposal. The causal pathway needs to explain what changes next and why.  Participants learn to:<\/p><ul><li>distinguish inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes and impact<\/li><li>write result statements as changes rather than completed activities<\/li><li>work backward from impact to intermediate and immediate outcomes<\/li><li>map multiple pathways where one linear chain is unrealistic<\/li><li>identify necessary preconditions between major results<\/li><li>distinguish direct programme control from contribution and influence<\/li><li>connect stakeholder behaviour to the pathway<\/li><li>identify feedback loops and non-linear relationships<\/li><li>keep a theory useful without making it unreadably complex<\/li><li>test whether each causal link has a plausible mechanism.<\/li><\/ul><p class=\"toc-work\"><strong>Workshop:<\/strong> Build and challenge a results chain for a real programme problem.<\/p><\/div><\/div><div class=\"toc-m\"><div class=\"toc-mh\"><div class=\"toc-mn\">3<\/div><strong>Assumptions, Risks, Evidence and Alternative Explanations<\/strong><\/div><div class=\"toc-mb\"><p><strong>Why this module matters:<\/strong> The most important parts of a Theory of Change are often the arrows, not the boxes. Those arrows contain assumptions about behaviour, institutions, incentives and context that can make the intervention succeed or fail.  Participants learn to:<\/p><ul><li>define causal assumptions between results<\/li><li>distinguish assumptions from risks and external factors<\/li><li>identify enabling conditions the programme does not directly control<\/li><li>assess which assumptions are critical enough to monitor<\/li><li>connect assumptions with available evidence<\/li><li>identify weak or contested causal links<\/li><li>consider alternative explanations for expected change<\/li><li>recognise unintended positive and negative effects<\/li><li>avoid overclaiming programme attribution<\/li><li>decide where adaptive management needs explicit decision triggers.<\/li><\/ul><p class=\"toc-work\"><strong>Simulation:<\/strong> Stress-test a programme theory against changes in context, partner behaviour and participant response.<\/p><\/div><\/div><div class=\"toc-m\"><div class=\"toc-mh\"><div class=\"toc-mn\">4<\/div><strong>From Theory of Change to Logframe and Indicators<\/strong><\/div><div class=\"toc-mb\"><p><strong>Why this module matters:<\/strong> A logframe should operationalise programme logic, not replace it. Indicators become meaningful only after the result they are meant to represent is clear.  Participants learn to:<\/p><ul><li>translate the Theory of Change into a concise results\/logical framework<\/li><li>preserve vertical logic from activities through outcomes<\/li><li>define indicators at appropriate result levels<\/li><li>write qualitative and quantitative indicators<\/li><li>set baselines and targets where evidence allows<\/li><li>identify means of verification and realistic data sources<\/li><li>distinguish output completion from outcome change<\/li><li>connect assumptions and risks to the framework<\/li><li>avoid indicator overload<\/li><li>check that the proposal, workplan, budget and M&amp;E plan describe the same intervention.<\/li><\/ul><p class=\"toc-work\"><strong>Workshop:<\/strong> Convert a Theory of Change into a complete logframe\/results framework.<\/p><\/div><\/div><div class=\"toc-m\"><div class=\"toc-mh\"><div class=\"toc-mn\">5<\/div><strong>Validation, Facilitation, Monitoring and Adaptive Use<\/strong><\/div><div class=\"toc-mb\"><p><strong>Why this module matters:<\/strong> A Theory of Change has little value if it is created by one consultant, approved once and never used again. Its value comes from shared understanding and from being tested against implementation evidence.  Participants learn to:<\/p><ul><li>facilitate Theory-of-Change workshops with different stakeholder groups<\/li><li>manage disagreements about causal pathways transparently<\/li><li>validate assumptions with technical and community knowledge<\/li><li>use the ToC to prioritise monitoring questions<\/li><li>connect programme learning with causal assumptions<\/li><li>review the theory when context or evidence changes<\/li><li>use contribution logic in evaluation design<\/li><li>communicate complex programme logic to donors and non-technical stakeholders<\/li><li>maintain version control so changes in programme theory remain visible<\/li><li>use the Theory of Change as a management tool in programme review.<\/li><\/ul><p class=\"toc-work\"><strong>Capstone:<\/strong> Present and defend a full Theory of Change, narrative and logframe for peer challenge.<\/p><\/div><\/div><div style=\"border:1.5px solid #b8ddd7;border-radius:14px;overflow:hidden;margin-bottom:44px\"><div style=\"background:#f1faf8;padding:18px 24px;border-bottom:1px solid #b8ddd7\"><strong style=\"color:#173e39\">Course At a Glance<\/strong><\/div><table class=\"toc-tbl\"><tr><td style=\"font-weight:600;color:#173e39;width:35%\">Format<\/td><td style=\"color:#3a5578\">Comprehensive modular curriculum, delivered flexibly to match programme length<\/td><\/tr><tr><td style=\"font-weight:600;color:#173e39;width:35%\">Locations<\/td><td style=\"color:#3a5578\">Multiple locations, online available<\/td><\/tr><tr><td style=\"font-weight:600;color:#173e39;width:35%\">Methodology<\/td><td style=\"color:#3a5578\">Problem analysis, causal mapping, assumption stress tests, logframe workshops and a capstone programme-logic package<\/td><\/tr><tr><td style=\"font-weight:600;color:#173e39;width:35%\">Best for<\/td><td style=\"color:#3a5578\">Programme managers, M&amp;E\/MEAL teams, grant writers, policy professionals, NGOs and programme-design consultants<\/td><\/tr><tr><td style=\"font-weight:600;color:#173e39;width:35%\">What's Included<\/td><td style=\"color:#3a5578\">Problem-analysis template, ToC canvas, assumptions register, results-chain worksheet, logframe template, indicator checklist and certificate<\/td><\/tr><\/table><\/div><div class=\"matsh-cluster-link\" style=\"margin:34px 0;padding:20px 22px;border:1px solid #d9e2ea;border-radius:12px;background:#f8fafc\"><strong>Explore the wider Governance &amp; Compliance cluster:<\/strong> <a href=\"https:\/\/matsh.co\/en\/course-category\/governance-compliance\/\">browse related Governance &amp; Compliance courses<\/a> to compare adjacent skills, pathways and training options.<\/div>\n<h2 class=\"toc-h\">Common Questions<\/h2><div style=\"margin-bottom:44px\"><div class=\"toc-faq\"><b>How is this different from Monitoring and Evaluation?<\/b><span>Monitoring and Evaluation focuses on how programme performance is measured, analysed and used. This course goes deeper into the causal programme logic that should exist before indicators and evaluation methods are selected.<\/span><\/div><div class=\"toc-faq\"><b>Is a Theory of Change the same as a logframe?<\/b><span>No. A Theory of Change explains how and why change is expected to happen, including assumptions, context and causal pathways. A logframe is a more structured management framework that summarises results, indicators, verification and assumptions. The course teaches how to connect them rather than treat them as competing tools.<\/span><\/div><div class=\"toc-faq\"><b>Is this only for donor-funded programmes?<\/b><span>No. The approach applies to government policy, CSR, foundations, NGOs, social programmes and internal organisational change. Donor-funded examples are common because those environments frequently require explicit results frameworks.<\/span><\/div><div class=\"toc-faq\"><b>Do participants need M&amp;E experience?<\/b><span>No. Programme-design experience helps, but the course builds the concepts from first principles. Experienced M&amp;E professionals benefit from the deeper emphasis on causality and assumption testing.<\/span><\/div><div class=\"toc-faq\"><b>Can an in-house cohort build our actual Theory of Change?<\/b><span>Yes. That is often the most valuable in-house format, provided the right programme stakeholders participate and enough evidence\/context is available.<\/span><\/div><\/div><div class=\"toc-rel\"><a href=\"\/en\/course\/monitoring-and-evaluation-course\/\">\u2192 Monitoring and Evaluation<\/a><a href=\"\/en\/course\/grant-writing-for-gcc-africa-ngos\/\">\u2192 Grant Writing for GCC and Africa NGOs<\/a><a href=\"\/en\/course\/civil-society-and-sustainable-development-course\/\">\u2192 Civil Society and Sustainable Development<\/a><a href=\"\/en\/course\/grant-management-donor-compliance-course\/\">\u2192 Grant Management and Donor Compliance<\/a><\/div><div class=\"toc-cta\"><h3>A Good Logframe Should Be the Compressed Version of a Strong Programme Logic, Not a Table Created to Satisfy a Donor Template.<\/h3><p>Build a Theory of Change that makes the programme's reasoning visible, testable and useful from design through evaluation.<\/p><div style=\"display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;gap:14px;justify-content:center\"><a href=\"\/en\/register\/?course=Theory+of+Change+and+Logical+Framework+Design\" style=\"background:#fff;color:#173e39;font-weight:800;padding:14px 32px;border-radius:8px;text-decoration:none\">Register Now \u2192<\/a><a href=\"\/en\/upcoming-courses\/?course=theory-of-change-logical-framework-design-course\" style=\"background:transparent;color:#fff;padding:14px 32px;border-radius:8px;font-weight:700;text-decoration:none\">View All Dates<\/a><a href=\"\/en\/contact-us\/?type=inhouse&amp;course=Theory+of+Change+and+Logical+Framework+Design\" style=\"background:transparent;color:#fff;padding:14px 32px;border-radius:8px;font-weight:700;text-decoration:none\">In-House for My Team<\/a><\/div><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Build credible programme logic through problem analysis, causal pathways, assumptions, results chains, Theory of Change, logframes and defensible indicators. Includes applied governance, evidence and decision tools.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":10893,"template":"","meta":{"_kad_post_transparent":"","_kad_post_title":"","_kad_post_layout":"","_kad_post_sidebar_id":"","_kad_post_content_style":"","_kad_post_vertical_padding":"","_kad_post_feature":"","_kad_post_feature_position":"","_kad_post_header":false,"_kad_post_footer":false,"_kad_post_classname":""},"course_pillar":[392],"course-category":[476],"venue":[],"class_list":["post-10371","course","type-course","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","course_pillar-professional","course-category-governance-compliance"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/matsh.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/course\/10371","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/matsh.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/course"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/matsh.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/course"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/matsh.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/10893"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/matsh.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10371"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"course_pillar","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/matsh.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/course_pillar?post=10371"},{"taxonomy":"course-category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/matsh.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/course-category?post=10371"},{"taxonomy":"venue","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/matsh.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/venue?post=10371"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}