Show your programme made a difference, with evidence that stands up.
Evaluation of training, leadership, wellbeing and social-impact programmes, designed to hold up when a buyer, funder or board asks hard questions.
Satisfaction scores are not evidence of impact.
An end-of-course feedback form shows participants enjoyed the programme. It tells a buyer nothing about whether anything changed, so when a procurement lead, funder or sceptical HR director asks what the programme did, the honest answer is usually “we don't know”.
The fix is rarely a randomised trial. It is asking the right questions before delivery, measuring at the right times, and checking the programme ran as designed.
Who this is for
- Training and leadership development providers who need impact evidence for tenders, renewals and case studies.
- Workplace wellbeing providers whose buyers now want outcome data, not attendance figures.
- Charities and social-impact organisations reporting to funders or building the evidence for the next bid.
- Consultancies who want to know, privately, which parts of their programme are doing the work.
What you receive
Theory of Change
A one-page account of what the programme should change, for whom and how, agreed before anything is measured.
Evaluation design
What to measure, when, from whom and against what comparison, sized to your cohorts and budget.
Measurement instruments
Validated scales where good ones exist; purpose-built items, tested before use, where they don't.
Fidelity assessment
Whether the programme ran as designed. Without it, a null result is uninterpretable and a positive one fragile.
Quantitative analysis
Change across pre, post and follow-up, with effect sizes, uncertainty and subgroup patterns.
Qualitative analysis
Systematic analysis of open-ended feedback and interviews, integrated with the numbers.
Client-ready report
Written for the reader who must decide, with a technical appendix for the reader who must check.
Recommendations
What to keep, what to change, and what to measure next time so the evidence strengthens with each cohort.
Example: a six-week Emerging Manager Programme
Participants rate the programme highly, but the client's HR director wants to know what changed and whether it lasted. We agree five outcomes and measure each with three short statements before the programme, at the end and eight weeks later. Thirty managers enrol; 28 complete the post-programme survey and 24 the follow-up.
- Moved: difficult conversations, with a standardised effect of 0.67 and 86% of managers scoring higher afterwards.
- Faded: role clarity, largely back to baseline at eight weeks.
- Recommended: a short reinforcement input at ten to twelve weeks, in a four-page document the provider can put in front of the client.
Read the full example report (PDF, 4 pages) (opens in a new tab)
Two ways to start
Evaluation Readiness Review
For programmes that already run. I review what you collect, what claims it can support, and what the smallest credible evaluation would be.
You receive: a written review (typically 8–12 pages) and a one-hour call.
Timeline: two weeks from receiving your materials.
Fee: from £1,500, fixed.
Full programme evaluation
Everything listed above, from design to final report, across one or more cohorts.
Timeline: follows your delivery schedule; analysis and reporting typically take four to eight weeks after the last data comes in.
Fee: typically £6,000–£20,000 depending on cohorts, instruments and the depth of qualitative work. Quoted as a fixed fee after scoping.
How an engagement works
Scoping call. What do you need to be able to say, to whom, and by when?
Theory of Change session. A half-day with you, and your client where useful, to agree what the programme should change and how we would know.
Design and instruments. Measurement points, comparison strategy, surveys and interview guides, piloted before use.
Data collection. Run by your team with my materials, or by me. Participant data is handled under a written agreement.
Analysis and report. Findings, plainly stated limitations, recommendations and a walkthrough call.
Questions you might have
We don't have a control group.
Most providers don't. There are credible designs without one: pre/post with follow-up, waitlist comparisons, dose-response across cohorts, and benchmarking against published norms. I'll be explicit about what each can and cannot claim.
Our cohorts are small.
Twelve to twenty people per cohort is normal. Small samples limit precision, not honesty. The design pools across cohorts where appropriate and the report states uncertainty rather than hiding it.
We already collect feedback. Can you use it?
Usually, yes, as one input. The Evaluation Readiness Review exists precisely to tell you what your existing data can support.
Will our clients be named?
Only with their written permission. Reports are written for you; anything shared beyond you is anonymised unless agreed otherwise.
Do you work outside the UK?
Yes, remotely. Data collection is usually run by your team with my materials, so location rarely matters.
Can you run the fieldwork?
No. If you need a multi-site trial with a field team collecting data, I can design it and advise on it, but I can't staff it. For everything short of that, data collection either runs through your team with my materials, or through me.
Start with a conversation
Tell me what the programme is and who needs convincing. I'll say what the smallest credible evaluation would be, and whether I'm the right person for it.
Selling an assessment rather than running a programme? See Assessment Validation.