What do statistics and stories each show about impact?
Statistics and stories each show a different part of a program's impact. Numbers can show patterns, magnitude, change, differences between groups, and relationships, such as how many participants completed a program, how their results compare with the program's goals, or whether one site's results differ from another's. Stories, interviews, and participants' own words can help explain experiences, context, barriers, motivations, and why a pattern may be occurring.
What each kind of evidence can show
| Statistics can show | Stories and participants' words can show |
|---|
| How many people took part, and who they were | What taking part was like for the people involved |
| How much changed, and for how many participants | What that change meant in someone's life or work |
| Whether results differ by group, site, or year | Why one group's experience may have differed from another's |
| Progress toward the outcomes the program promised | Barriers and conditions the numbers alone can't identify |
Used together, they provide a much more complete picture of the program than either can provide alone.
How do we decide whether to lead with a story or a statistic for a particular audience?
To decide whether to lead with a story or a statistic for a particular audience, start with the first question that audience is likely to bring. A funder reviewing an annual report may first want to know whether the program reached the participants it promised to serve and made progress toward its outcomes, so a statistic may belong first. An audience at a community event may first want to understand what the program means for families like theirs, so a participant's experience may belong first. These are examples, and your own funder, board, or community may have different priorities.
Whichever you lead with, the other should follow closely. A statistic presented first needs a story or quotation that shows what it meant to the people behind it, and a story presented first needs the evidence that shows how widely the experience was shared. If you're preparing results for a board, How do I explain our results to a board that just wants numbers? covers that audience.
How do we pair a story with the numbers so each supports the other?
To pair a story with the numbers so each supports the other, choose a story that reflects a pattern your data shows, and say so. For example, if a survey found that participants reported lower satisfaction with one part of a program, interviews or focus groups might help explain why, and a participant's description of that part of the program can make the finding concrete. The statistic tells the audience how common the experience was, and the participant's words help them understand it.
Be honest about how representative the story is. If a participant's experience is typical, say that most participants reported something similar. If it's an exceptional case, present it as one example rather than as evidence of what happened to everyone. Using a participant's words also requires their permission and care with their privacy, which How do we share results with the community without breaking trust? covers. What separates a credible story from an emotional one is the subject of What makes an impact story credible instead of just emotional?
What's the risk of relying only on stories or only on statistics?
The risk of relying only on stories or only on statistics is that the audience gets an incomplete picture of the program's impact. A report built only on numbers may be technically accurate and still leave readers asking what the results mean and why they matter. Saying that a program "served 200 people" reports activity, but it doesn't say who participated, what they experienced, what changed, or why that change matters.
A report built only on stories has the opposite problem. A moving story can't show how many participants had a similar experience, and a story chosen because it's compelling may represent the best outcome rather than the typical one.
The Grantibly perspective
Angelika's perspective
We don't see quantitative and qualitative methods as competing approaches. Numbers can show patterns, magnitude, change, differences, and relationships. Qualitative data can help explain experiences, context, processes, barriers, motivations, and why a pattern may be occurring. Used together, they can provide a much more complete picture.
Organizations doing meaningful work often know their programs are making a difference but struggle to demonstrate that difference. Evaluation can help them move beyond saying how many people they served to explaining who participated, what they experienced, what changed, why that change matters, what the organization learned, and what happens next. That's the difference between reporting activity and communicating impact.
