Endline Evaluations

Prove what you achieved — and what it cost to achieve it.

An endline evaluation assesses achievement against every target, applies the OECD-DAC criteria, and answers the value-for-money question your funder will certainly ask.

Request a proposal Book a scoping call

8–12wk

Typical timeline

DAC criteria applied

100%

Targets assessed

Board-ready summary

When to commission it

The report that determines whether you are funded again

An endline is read by people deciding where next year's money goes. A vague one wastes the achievement; a rigorous one turns three years of work into a credible track record.

We assess every target against its baseline, apply the DAC criteria properly, analyse cost per outcome, and separate what the programme achieved from what the wider context delivered anyway — which is exactly the distinction a sceptical reviewer will probe.

Request a proposal Book a scoping call

Endline Evaluations 8–12 weeks

THE QUESTION IT ANSWERS

“Did it work, and was it worth the money?”

CORE OUTPUTS

Achievement against every target
OECD-DAC criteria assessment
Value-for-money analysis
Lessons learned and sustainability outlook

STAGE

At completion

TYPICAL COST

US$15,000–45,000

Method

How we run it

Inception & ToC review

Reconstruct or review the theory of change and agree the evaluation matrix against the ToR.

Mixed-methods collection

Endline survey comparable to baseline, plus KIIs, focus groups and document review.

Analysis

Change tested against baseline, DAC criteria assessed, value-for-money analysed against actual spend.

Validation & delivery

Findings workshop with stakeholders, then final report, summary and presentation.

Deliverables

What you receive

Achievement against targets

Every indicator scored against target and baseline, with significance testing where applicable.

OECD-DAC assessment

Relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability, each evidenced.

Value-for-money analysis

Cost per outcome and per beneficiary, with economy, efficiency and equity assessed.

Lessons learned

What to repeat, what to change and what to stop — written for your next proposal.

Donor-format report

Technical report plus a management summary in the template your funder requires.

Validation workshop

Findings presented to stakeholders before finalisation so nothing lands as a surprise.

What reviewers look for

Five things that make an endline credible

Comparison to baseline

Achievement claims without a baseline reference are opinion, not evidence.

Beneficiary voice

Quantitative results triangulated against what participants actually say.

Honest cost analysis

Cost per outcome stated even when the number is uncomfortable.

Unintended effects

Good evaluations report the side effects nobody planned for.

Stated limitations

A report that admits its own weaknesses is trusted on everything else.

Usable lessons

Specific and actionable, not “stakeholder engagement should be strengthened”.

Request a proposal

Other evaluation types

Often commissioned alongside this

Baseline Evaluations

Establish a defensible benchmark before implementation

Open

Midline Evaluations

Course-correct while there is still time to act

Open

Process Evaluations

Diagnose delivery quality and operational efficiency

Open

Needs Assessments

Locate the real gaps before you commit resources

Open

Impact Assessments

Measure long-term social and economic change

Open

FAQ

Questions we get asked

Yes, with honest caveats. We reconstruct a starting position from monitoring records, administrative data and recall methods, and we state clearly which findings are robust and which are indicative. It is weaker than a baseline comparison and we will not pretend otherwise.

We regularly deliver in UN agency, World Bank, EU, FCDO, USAID and INGO templates, including required annexes and evaluation matrices. Send us the template with the ToR and the report arrives in it.

Cost per outcome and per beneficiary against comparable interventions where benchmarks exist, structured around economy, efficiency, effectiveness and equity. Where no credible benchmark exists we say that rather than inventing one.

Yes, included as standard. We present the method and defend the findings directly, which is generally more convincing than your team relaying an external evaluator's reasoning.

You get a full right of reply. Factual corrections we make immediately; differences of interpretation we record in the report as a management response alongside our finding. What we do not do is remove an evidenced conclusion because it is unwelcome.

Get started

Send us the terms of reference.

You will get a method, a named team, a timeline and a fixed price — and an honest opinion on whether this is the right evaluation for your question.

Request a proposal Book a scoping call

No obligation · Response within one business day · NDA on request