Evidence that survives scrutiny.
Ten years of monitoring, evaluation and learning for UN agencies, development banks, international NGOs and governments. Independent, rigorous and delivered on the date we promised.
Organisations whose reporting cannot be questioned
Six evaluations, mapped to the project cycle
Which one you need depends entirely on where you are and what decision is waiting on the answer. Open any of them for method, timeline and deliverables.
Baseline Evaluations
6–10 weeksEstablish a defensible benchmark before implementation
“What is the situation right now, measured properly?”
- Indicator framework with agreed definitions
- Baseline values for every indicator
- Disaggregation by sex, age, location and vulnerability
- Sampling and weighting documentation
Midline Evaluations
5–8 weeksCourse-correct while there is still time to act
“Is this working, and what should we change now?”
- Progress against baseline values
- What is working and what is not, with evidence
- Course-correction recommendations you can still act on
- Risk register update
Endline Evaluations
8–12 weeksProve outcomes, effectiveness and value for money
“Did it work, and was it worth the money?”
- Achievement against every target
- OECD-DAC criteria assessment
- Value-for-money analysis
- Lessons learned and sustainability outlook
Process Evaluations
4–8 weeksDiagnose delivery quality and operational efficiency
“Why is delivery slower and messier than planned?”
- Process map of how delivery actually happens
- Bottleneck and delay analysis
- Fidelity assessment against the design
- Operational fixes ranked by effort and impact
Needs Assessments
5–9 weeksLocate the real gaps before you commit resources
“What do people actually need, in priority order?”
- Prioritised needs by group and geography
- Existing provision and gap mapping
- Barriers to access analysis
- Design recommendations with target groups defined
Impact Assessments
10–16 weeksMeasure long-term social and economic change
“What changed because of us, and not for other reasons?”
- Attributable impact with a credible counterfactual
- Intended and unintended effects
- Cost-effectiveness per outcome achieved
- Sustainability of change over time
Where each evaluation belongs
Commission the wrong one at the wrong moment and you get an expensive document nobody can act on. This is the sequence that works.
| Project stage | Evaluation | Time |
|---|---|---|
| Before you design the intervention | Needs Assessment | 5–9 weeks |
| Design agreed, before activities start | Baseline Evaluation | 6–10 weeks |
| Roughly halfway through delivery | Midline Evaluation | 5–8 weeks |
| Delivery is struggling and you need to know why | Process Evaluation | 4–8 weeks |
| At the close of the programme | Endline Evaluation | 8–12 weeks |
| One to five years after completion | Impact Assessment | 10–16 weeks |
Why our findings hold up in a review meeting
Evaluation reports get challenged — by donors, boards, auditors and sometimes by the implementing team. Ours are built to withstand that from the start.
- OECD-DAC criteria applied: relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, sustainability
- Mixed methods — quantitative survey plus qualitative depth, triangulated against each other
- Sampling calculated and disclosed, with weighting where the design requires it
- 10% of interviews independently back-checked by a supervisor
- Ethics protocol: informed consent, anonymity, safeguarding and do-no-harm
- Limitations stated plainly in the report rather than hidden in an annex
Regional field network
Trained enumerators across Zimbabwe and the wider region.
Independent voice
We report what the data shows, including when it is unwelcome.
Multi-language
Shona, Ndebele, English and other regional languages.
On the promised date
Deadlines matter when a donor report is due.
Ethics approved
Consent, anonymity and safeguarding on every study.
Data handed over
Anonymised datasets and instruments, yours to keep.
Methods we bring to every engagement
Household & facility surveys
Structured quantitative collection at scale, on tablets with GPS and offline capture.
Focus groups & KIIs
Facilitated discussions and key informant interviews in local languages.
Statistical analysis
SPSS, Stata, R and Python — regression, difference-in-differences, propensity matching.
Qualitative coding
Thematic analysis with NVivo-style rigour, AI-assisted where volume demands it.
GIS & spatial analysis
Mapping coverage, access and outcome distribution geographically.
Value for money
Economy, efficiency, effectiveness and equity assessment against spend.
Theory of change
Logic models and results frameworks built or reconstructed with your team.
MEL system design
Indicator frameworks and data systems your team can actually run afterwards.
Evaluation budgets typically range from US$8,000 for a focused process evaluation to US$65,000+ for multi-country impact assessment. Every proposal carries a fixed price, a named team and a delivery date.
What commissioners ask us
Send us your terms of reference.
We will respond with a method, a team, a timeline and a fixed price — and we will tell you if the ToR is asking for the wrong evaluation.
No obligation · Response within one business day · NDA on request