Study Guide 1: Evaluation Foundations, Impact, and Outcome Dimensions

Core focus of evaluation foundations

This guide introduces the basic logic used in evaluation and impact thinking. In these handouts, a key distinction is made between activities, outputs, outcomes, and long-term impacts. Activities are what a program does with its resources. Outputs are the immediate evidence of service delivery. Outcomes are the changes that follow for participants or communities over time, and impacts refer to longer-term change.

The study materials stress that evaluation should not stop at counting delivery. Measuring how many services were provided or how many people attended tells us about outputs, but not yet whether meaningful change occurred.

Outputs versus outcomes

• Outputs are direct products of implementation, such as numbers trained, houses built, classes attended, or patients seen.
• Outcomes are changes resulting from those activities and outputs, such as improved health, housing security, job readiness, confidence to find work, or psychological well-being.

This distinction matters because evaluation questions differ depending on whether the interest is in delivery, participation, or change.

Outcome dimensions over time

The handouts organise change across time horizons:

• Short-term outcomes: early changes that can be expected soon after participation or implementation.
• Medium-term outcomes: changes that emerge after earlier outcomes have begun to take hold.
• Long-term outcomes / impacts: broader or more durable changes expected after sustained program influence and other contributing conditions.

The materials emphasise selecting at least one measure and data source for outcomes at each time horizon when designing evaluation.

What evaluation can examine

The handouts distinguish process evaluation from outcome evaluation.

• Process evaluation looks at how activities are actually implemented.
• Participation-focused process questions examine who is taking part and to what degree.
• Outcome evaluation examines whether expected short-, medium-, and long-term changes are occurring.

These distinctions help ensure evaluation is aligned with the part of the program logic being assessed.

Why this matters for impact evaluation

A strong evaluation foundation requires clarity about the chain from resources to activities, outputs, outcomes, and impacts. Without that clarity, it becomes difficult to decide what should be measured, when it should be measured, and what kind of evidence is relevant. The handouts therefore present outcome thinking as essential to both monitoring and evaluation.

Examples used in the materials

The handouts contrast delivery indicators with change indicators. For example:

• Number of houses built is an output, while people housed and housing security point toward outcomes.
• Number of patients seen is an output, while improved health and patient well-being are outcomes.
• Students attending workshops or classes attended are outputs, while job readiness, confidence to find work, and student retention are outcomes.

Key takeaway

The foundational message is that evaluation should be built around change, not only delivery. Good evaluation design identifies what the program does, who participates, what evidence shows implementation occurred, and what short-, medium-, and long-term changes should be measured.

Primary sources: [W1_2_Evaluation_Foundations_Handouts_material_for_IMPACT_82466778](material:110); supporting comparisons and evaluation structure from [W1_3_Groundwork_Handouts_for_Theory_of_Change_82466778](material:111).