Purpose, outputs and method
- Outputs: evaluation design, baseline and findings
- Method: mixed methods and predefined criteria
- Attribution and data quality are reported transparently
Engagement and limitations
Scope and deliverables are agreed in advance. Appropriate ethics, data rights, permissions and quality review are assessed for each project. GFSR does not undertake operational forensic casework or issue official findings in individual cases.
Discuss a research collaborationRESEARCH & PRACTICAL GUIDANCE
Start with the program logic
Evaluation clarifies how activities are expected to lead to outputs and outcomes. A research-capacity program may produce training sessions, but attendance alone does not establish improved methodological quality. Define the change of interest and the evidence needed to observe it before selecting indicators.
Questions and evaluation designs
A process evaluation examines delivery and barriers; an outcome evaluation examines change; an impact study asks what difference the intervention made compared with a credible alternative. The strength of attribution depends on the design, data quality and context. Not every program can support a causal claim.
- Baseline and intended outcomes
- Comparison or counterfactual where feasible
- Participant selection and missing observations
- Implementation context and unintended effects
Evidence collection and independence
Administrative data, surveys, interviews and document review can contribute different perspectives. Specify their limitations and avoid relying exclusively on favorable testimonials. Evaluator independence, conflicts and the institution’s role in checking facts should be agreed without granting a right to suppress unwelcome findings.
Deliverables and learning
A package may include an evaluation framework, indicator dictionary, baseline report, findings and an improvement plan. Recommendations should identify the evidence and responsible implementation role. A follow-up review can test progress, but future improvement should not be promised merely because an evaluation report has been delivered.
Illustrative research program
A proposed evaluation of researcher training could examine protocol quality before and after the program, participant experience and use of the methods in later work. Any observed change would still require consideration of selection, other support and follow-up duration. This example illustrates design choices rather than a completed GFSR impact claim.