Evaluating impact is more than applying surveys, it is an orderly process to make decisions with evidence. At Resuelve we do it in six steps: understand the current state, align strategy, prototype evidence, design evidence, collect evidence and report evidence. Each step connects the theory of change with the reality of the population and with what the team can really do. The goal is not just to measure, but to learn what works, what to adjust, and how to deliver on the promise of social impact: changing the lives of others.

Understand the current state

Before measuring, we need to become experts in the context of the program. This first step is to delve deeply into the specific topic: what is being done today, with whom, where, under what conditions and with what known or perceived results.

Here Resolve reviews documents, figures, previous studies and, above all, listens to key people: internal team, allies and target population. The goal is to put together a clear snapshot of where you started: problems, gaps, current efforts, achievements, and pains.

In this phase we seek to answer questions such as:

  • What is the problem that the program is trying to solve today, in practice?
  • What has been tried before and with what results?
  • What time, resource or context limitations exist?

Align strategy, objectives and theory of change

The theory of change is the road map to change the lives of others (the step by step to achieve it). Here we review whether what the program does today is really connected to the change it promises.

At Resuelve, this includes understanding the theory of change by dimensions and subdimensions: that is, dividing the strategy into parts that do not step on each other and that, together, cover everything important (something like a list “without gaps or repetitions”). For example, one dimension may be “employability” and within it there may be sub-dimensions such as “skills”, “active search” and “support networks”.

This step seeks to ensure that each program activity has a clear place within these dimensions and subdimensions, and that each dimension is linked to a specific change that is to be achieved. This way we avoid loose activities that do not contribute to the objective or dimensions that are so general that they do not help to decide.

This implies:

  • Review and adjust objectives so that they are specific and achievable.
  • Verify that interventions (what is done to try to change lives) make sense in the face of the identified problem.
  • Ensure that the proposed routes (activities → outputs → results → impacts) are consistent with the population and the context.

The result is a shared goal, everyone is clear about what change is expected to be seen, with what deadlines and through what mechanisms.

Prototype evidence

In this step, indicators and reference frameworks from different sources are explored: national and international literature, sectoral frameworks, cultural and organizational criteria. The key is to test, in a small way, which indicators and questions really help answer the program's doubts.

Instead of launching a large measurement immediately, a low-cost prototype is put together, this is like a small version of the evaluation, with a small group of people and a limited number of indicators and questions. It serves to test whether the language is understood, whether the logistics work, how long it takes to respond, and whether the information that comes out really helps answer the program's questions.

This prototype serves to:

  • See if people understand the questions and answer them comfortably.
  • Identify which indicators are measurable (viable) with the data and time available.
  • Test whether the information generated is communicable and useful for deciding.

It is better to correct the design of the evidence in a small way than to realize it late, when all the measurement has already been done.

Design evidence

With the fine-tuned prototype comes the full design evidence. This defines how it will be measured, where, with whom and through what instruments. It is time to download the methodological plan in detail.

This step includes:

  • Design the instruments (surveys, interview guides, registration forms, etc.).
  • Define the type of evaluation that will be used: evaluate potential for change (a moment), evaluate over time (before and after) or evaluate with control (comparing with a similar group without a program).
  • Establish the sampling plan: who is measured, how many people, at what times.
  • Decide whether the collection will be done by the Resuelve team, the program team or a third party. If another team will do it, clear training on instruments, ethics and protocols is scheduled.

The result is a concrete and viable measurement plan, which the team understands and can implement without slowing down the operation.

Collect evidence

In this step, you go from paper to action: implement the collection plan. Here the instruments, field teams, agendas and defined channels are put into action.

During harvesting, special care is taken:

  • Follow agreed protocols (who asks, how, in what order).
  • Respect informed consent and the protection of personal data.
  • Monitor data quality: review consistency, conduct pilot tests, correct errors in time.
  • Record any changes to what was planned (for example, access difficulties to some areas or sample settings).

Good collection is as important as good design; without quality data, the evaluation loses strength.

Report evidence

Finally, it is time to translate the evidence into clear messages to decide. It is not just about making a long report, but about delivering different formats that connect with the people who make decisions.

In Resolves, reporting includes:

  • Written reports with methodology, key findings and actionable recommendations.
  • Executive presentations for management teams, with emphasis on possible decisions.
  • Media kits or visual pieces (infographics, summaries, dashboards) to communicate results to allies or external audiences, when applicable.

What changed, to what magnitude, for whom and, depending on the design used, how much can be attributed to the program are explained. The limits of the evidence and suggested next steps are also made clear.

Frequently asked questions

Conclusion

Evaluating impact is not just “measuring at the end”, it is traveling an ordered path of six steps: understanding the current state, aligning the strategy, prototyping and designing the evidence, collecting quality data and reporting findings that serve to decide. Thus, the evaluation stops being an external requirement and becomes a tool to improve the program and better fulfill the promise of impact social -changing the lives of others-. Do you want to apply this step by step to your program with a realistic and actionable plan? Let's talk.