High Quality Evidence Impact Tool

High Quality Evidence of Impact Flowchart

At a minimum, strong evidence of impact is:

Next, strong evidence of impact is:


Right facing arrow
When possible, it should:

Outcomes-based

• 
  Evidence focuses on the results of the programmatic feature.
  

Aligned with Criterion

• 
  Practices and evidence of impact should be directly linked to the criterion being evaluated. It must address all aspects of the criterion.
  

If your evidence is outcomes-based and aligned with criterion, move to the next components.

Specific, and wherever possible, quantifiable

• 
  Evidence of impact should be specific about the result for each programmatic feature. It should be descriptive of the outcome and, when possible, numeric in measure.
  

Measured by multiple sources

• 
  It is important to triangulate evidence from multiple sources, whenever possible. SOs should consult the Review Evaluation Tools in order to see the multiple sources of evidence ESE uses to evaluate a single criterion.
  

Interpreted

• 
  All evidence shared (whether it is state level data or SO-specific data) should be explained in a way that articulates the key takeaway(s).
  

Capture multiple points in time

• 
  This could include pre- and post- data; formative and summative data; and/or longitudinal data from multiple points throughout a year or over multiple years.
  

Overall, strong evidence of impact is:

Connected to plans and inputs

• 
  All evidence shared should be woven together in a cogent narrative that explains the connection between evidence of impact and inputs and clearly articulates any subsequent plans.
  

Appendix A: Examples