Note: This rubric is an early version (as of Nov. 2023) and may change significantly prior to its use to review new incoming grant applications or future grant applications.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Rating 1-5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Literature Review | No relevant studies on intervention | Few studies are relevant but they lack rigor (no counterfactual, high attrition), show limited effectiveness and is not appropriate to the context or environment of grantee | Some studies are relevant but show some promise of effectiveness but still limited by an inappropriate match to environment of grantee | Multiple rigorous studies demonstrate significant effectiveness of similar intervention with similar population with strong match to underlying theory or mechanism of change | Multiple rigorous studies demonstrate effectiveness of same intervention with same population | |
| Grantee Outcome Data | No impact data or information on grantee's participants after the intervention | Some qualitative and non representative participant outcome data | Outcome data for non representative sample | Representative outcome data disaggregated by different participant types | Existing outcome data for representative sample, with participant follow up data for more than one year | |
| Grantee Impact Rigor | No impact measurement studies or data | Output data on people served and activities delivered only, also may have a theory of change | Valid impact data with comparison group but not for the same grant’s intervention | Grantee reported outcome data with a valid comparison group or baseline comparison | 3rd party evaluation of grantee impact with a counterfactual | |
| Impact Data System | No customer feedback or data system created | Don’t have a standard approach to collecting customer impact data, only informal | Have some feedback mechanisms but collect participant feedback data inconsistently | Have a somewhat automated and formalized data capture approach that regularly captures feedback or impact data from participants | Well integrated process that is formalized, with an impact and data-driven leadership culture, with evidence that data feedback informs practices |