What can we ask an evaluator to change in a draft report?
In a draft report, you can ask an evaluator to change factual errors, missing context, unclear wording, and how the results are organized and presented. Those are the changes that make a report more accurate and easier to use, and a good evaluator should welcome them.
What you can ask for
| You can ask the evaluator to | For example |
|---|
| Correct a factual error | A wrong date, an incorrect program name, or a miscounted number of sessions |
| Add missing context | A staff change or a delayed start that the evaluator didn't know about and that helps explain a result |
| Reword unclear language | A technical term that members of your board are unlikely to know |
| Reorganize or redesign | Putting the summary first, adding charts, or making the report more visually appealing |
| Adapt it for an audience | A shorter version written for your board, your partners, or your community |
What doesn't change is what the evaluation found. If a correction affects the data, such as a count that was recorded wrong, the evaluator corrects the analysis too, because that's part of getting the report accurate.
If you think the evaluator misread something, say so and bring the information you have. New context, such as something that happened during the program that the evaluator didn't know about, can change how a result is explained in the report, although the data itself stays the same.
Why won't an evaluator soften the findings?
An evaluator won't soften the findings because the report is only worth something to your funder, and useful to your own team, if it's honest. A report that describes a program as stronger than the evidence shows can't tell your funder what's happening, and it can't tell your team what to fix.
An evaluation also shouldn't start from the assumption that a project is successful and then look for evidence to support that conclusion, because the purpose of an evaluation is to learn what's actually happening. At Grantibly, we decline work when the conclusion is decided before the evaluation begins, although we've never had to. Most people are honest and want a genuine evaluation. If what's behind a request to soften a report is worry about how a difficult result will be received, that worry is better answered by how the result is presented than by changing it.
If the worry is your grant, Will an evaluation report that shows our program isn't working cost us our grant? covers what is and isn't at risk.
How can difficult findings be presented so they're useful?
Difficult findings are most useful when they're presented next to what's working, with the context that explains them and what the team can do about them. A result on its own can leave a reader asking "So what?" The same result, with what may explain it and what it suggests the team should change, gives the reader something to act on.
That means giving what's working and what isn't the same plain treatment, each with its evidence. It also means explaining why a result may have come out the way it did, such as a part of the program that wasn't carried out as planned, and connecting the result to a next step the team can take. How do I turn program data into a report my funder actually reads? covers making any report readable, and How do I tell my funder the results aren't what we hoped? covers the conversation that goes with it.
The Grantibly perspective
Lauren's perspective
When a client reviews a draft report with us, we want them to tell us what's wrong, what's missing, and what doesn't make sense. We're educators as much as consultants. We don't just want to deliver findings; we want people to understand what those findings mean and how they can use them, and the review is one of the best chances to make that happen.
What we won't do is change what the evidence shows. A good evaluation partner should be willing to raise questions, challenge assumptions, and share findings that may be uncomfortable, and we do that in service of the project.
