What does "independent of the project" mean?
An evaluator who is independent of the project doesn't deliver the program, doesn't report to the people who lead it, and doesn't depend on the results looking good. Funders define the details differently, so check your solicitation. For example, NSF's Advanced Technological Education (ATE) program requires funds for an evaluator independent of the project. It allows that evaluator to work at the project's home institution if they're in a separate organizational unit with a different reporting line. Other funders and programs may set different rules.
Independence also has a professional side. The American Evaluation Association's Guiding Principles ask evaluators to disclose any actual, perceived, or potential conflicts of interest before they accept an evaluation, and to manage them throughout. When you talk with an evaluator, it's reasonable to ask how they'd handle a conflict if one came up.
An independent evaluator still works closely with the team. NSF's ATE solicitation expects project staff to work with the external evaluator to improve the quality of the data collected. A good external evaluator stays close to the work while keeping the judgment about results separate from the people delivering the program.
What's wrong with reporting on our own program?
What's wrong with reporting on your own program is the arrangement it creates. When the team that designs and runs a program also decides how well it's working, a reader has no way to tell how much the results reflect the program and how much they reflect the team's hopes for it. That's true even when the team is careful and honest, which most are.
The arrangement can also affect the information itself. Students or participants who depend on program staff for grades, services, or support may give the answers they think those staff want to hear. An external evaluator asking questions and keeping answers private removes that power dynamic, which can make the information more accurate as well as more credible.
Program teams still report on their own work all the time, and they should. Counts of activities, participation, and progress belong in your reports. What an external evaluator adds is an independent account of what those numbers mean and what the project is learning.
What does the program get from an external evaluator, not just the funder?
The program gets an evaluator whose job is to help the team learn while there's still time to act, along with results that carry weight outside the program. An external evaluator involved throughout the grant can share what's working and what isn't during the project, not just in a final report, so the team can adjust recruitment, supports, or activities as it goes.
Credible results also travel. They can strengthen your next proposal, support a request to your institution for continued funding, and help you explain the value of the work to partners, boards, and the people your program serves. If a result is disappointing, an independent account of what happened and why gives the team an honest basis for improving the program. It's an opportunity to do things better.
What does the evaluation process look like from kickoff to final report? walks through how that work unfolds across a grant.
The Grantibly perspective
Lauren's perspective
Evaluation may be required by a funder, but compliance should never be its only purpose. At its best, evaluation helps organizations understand what's working, what's not working, what they're learning, and what they should do next.
Evaluation shouldn't begin with the assumption that a project is successful and then look for evidence to support that conclusion. The purpose is to learn. We want clients to see evaluation as a source of information rather than a judgment.
