How we work

Our principles

Person first. Before we talk about methods, we learn about the community, the people a program serves and the conditions around them. A needs assessment in a small town and one for a regional health system need different questions.

Data informed, not data heavy. We follow a "minimum data" practice. We ask for the information an evaluation truly needs and look for it in records that already exist before adding anything new. Staff, clients and community members have limited time, and every extra form costs something.

Responsive. Programs change while they run. We use a developmental approach, sharing what we see along the way so you can adjust while there is still time, not months after the grant year ends.

How an evaluation usually runs

1. Plan. We agree on the questions the evaluation must answer. That usually means a logic model, measurable objectives and indicators that match your funder's requirements, whether that is the DFC core measures, GPRA or a state reporting template.
2. Collect. We start with data you already have: program records, reporting systems such as SPARS, electronic health record extracts and public sources. Then we fill the gaps with surveys, focus groups and key informant interviews.
3. Analyze. Quantitative data is cleaned and analyzed in tools such as SPSS, Alteryx, SAS and Excel. Qualitative data from interviews and open ended questions is coded for themes, using NVivo when a project calls for it. Where it fits, we test whether differences are statistically meaningful rather than reading too much into small changes.
4. Report. You get findings in plain language, with tables and charts your board, coalition and funders can follow. We present results in person or online when that helps.
5. Improve. We talk through what the results mean for the next year of the program, so the report leads to decisions.

How we run a needs assessment

We build a picture of what is already known before collecting anything new. That means gathering the available data on your focus area into one place, often as a visual compendium, and identifying where the data runs thin. We then collect new information through surveys, focus groups and key leader interviews, and work with you to set priorities. The result is a road map of priorities matched to evidence based or evidence informed practices.

For community health work we draw on established frameworks such as Mobilizing for Action through Planning and Partnerships (MAPP). For prevention work we follow SAMHSA's Strategic Prevention Framework.

How our surveys are built

The Youth Voices Count Survey is adapted from the ERASE Student Survey, which grew out of the Governor's Prevention Initiative for Youth Student Survey used across Connecticut in 2000. It also draws on the Connecticut School Health Survey and the CPES Young Adults Statewide Survey, and it is updated for issues young people face now, including vaping, online gaming, gambling, toxic stress and social media.

Youth and professionals in prevention, survey development, evaluation, internet safety and school mental health helped shape it through document reviews and focus groups. The survey is taken online, uses youth friendly language and takes most students about 20 minutes. It is available in Spanish.

Reports summarize key findings and trends in organized tables, and a statistical significance package highlights the protective factors that matter most for youth in each community.

Who does the work

Every project is led by members of our team, whose backgrounds include public health, epidemiology, community psychology and data analysis. You can read their bios on our About page. The same people stay with a project from kickoff to the final report.

Questions about our approach

If you want to know how this would work for your program, get in touch. We are happy to walk through a past project that looks like yours.