How to write a grant evaluation plan funders trust

The evaluation plan answers the question every funder eventually asks: How will you know it worked? A strong plan does more than satisfy reporting requirements. It shows you are a learning organization that will use data to improve, and it gives you the evidence you'll need for the next proposal.

The most common weakness in evaluation sections is vagueness: "We will survey participants and track attendance." Reviewers want to know what you will measure, with what tool, when, by whom, and what you will do with the results.

Process evaluation vs. outcome evaluation

CDC's 2024 Program Evaluation Framework, a free and practical reference that applies well beyond public health, defines the main types this way:

CDC's framework notes that outcome evaluation "cannot attribute causality," while impact evaluation compares outcomes with and without the program. That distinction matters for how you write about results: an outcome evaluation lets you say "70% of participants gained a grade level," not "our program caused a one-grade gain." The framework also suggests matching the evaluation to the program's stage: process evaluation is especially valuable in planning and early implementation, while mature programs are better positioned for outcome evaluation.

The building blocks of a plan

Evaluation questions

Start with two to five questions the evaluation will answer, drawn from your objectives and logic model. CDC's framework offers examples at each level, such as whether program resources are sufficient, whether the program is being implemented as planned, and whether it is reaching its intended audience.

Indicators

An indicator is the specific measure that tells you whether an objective is met. Good indicators are defined precisely enough that two people would calculate them the same way, with a numerator, denominator, baseline, and target.

Data sources and tools

Data collection schedule and responsibility

For each indicator, state when data will be collected and who is responsible. "Ongoing" is not a schedule.

Analysis and use

Describe how you'll analyze data (for example, comparing fall and spring scores by attendance level), how often staff review it, and how you'll use findings to improve. CDC's framework includes "act on findings" and "learn from and use insights" as core parts of evaluation, not afterthoughts.

A sample evaluation plan table

This table format is the clearest way to present a plan. Many reviewers look for it.

Writing the narrative around the table

The table carries the detail, but reviewers still want a few sentences of narrative explaining your approach. Aim for a short paragraph before the table (purpose, questions, design) and one after (analysis, use of findings, reporting).

Internal vs. external evaluation

Many organizations use a hybrid: staff collect data, and an external evaluator designs tools, analyzes results, and writes the report. CDC's framework lists "independence and objectivity" among its five evaluation standards (alongside relevance and utility, rigor, transparency, and ethics), which is one reason funders value outside evaluators for outcome claims.

Budgeting for evaluation

Evaluation costs belong in your budget, not absorbed silently by staff. Include:

• Evaluator fees (external or a share of an internal evaluation staff position)
• Staff time for data collection and entry
• Assessment instruments, licenses, or survey software
• Participant incentives for surveys or interviews, where the funder allows
• Data systems
• Translation of instruments

For federal awards, 2 CFR 200.413(b) lists program evaluation costs among those that may be charged as direct costs when they are directly related to a specific award. Some funders state an expected or maximum share of the budget for evaluation; follow it when they do. When they don't, size the evaluation to the grant's scale and the claims you want to make. See grant budget and indirect costs.

Federal performance measurement

If you receive federal funds, your evaluation plan connects to formal performance requirements. Under 2 CFR 200.301, federal agencies must measure recipients' performance and should communicate in the award the expected outcomes, indicators, targets, baseline data, and data collections the recipient must report, and any requirement to participate in federally funded evaluations. Read the NOFO for required performance measures and build them into your plan exactly as written. See grant reporting and post-award compliance.

Ethics and data protection

Address these briefly but explicitly, especially when working with children, health information, or vulnerable populations:

• Consent: How participants (or parents) consent to data collection.
• Privacy: How data is stored, who can access it, and how it is de-identified for reporting.
• Data-sharing agreements: With schools, health systems, or agencies; student and health records are subject to federal privacy laws, so check with your attorney or partner's privacy office.
• Burden: Keep surveys short and avoid collecting data you won't use.
• Cultural responsiveness: Translate instruments, test them with community members, and involve participants in interpreting results where possible. CDC's framework includes engaging collaboratively and advancing equity as cross-cutting actions throughout an evaluation.

Writing the evaluation section, step by step

1. List your objectives and pull evaluation questions from them.
2. Define one or two indicators per objective, with baseline and target.
3. Choose a tool or data source for each, preferring existing validated tools and data you already collect.
4. Set the schedule and responsible person for each.
5. Decide internal, external, or hybrid, and budget accordingly.
6. Describe analysis and how you'll use findings, including how often staff review data.
7. Address consent, privacy, and data agreements.
8. Present it in a table, with a short narrative before and after.

Common mistakes

• Measuring only outputs. Attendance counts don't show impact.
• No baseline. You can't show change without a starting point.
• Tools that don't match outcomes. A satisfaction survey can't measure reading improvement.
• Overpromising rigor. Don't propose a comparison group you can't recruit.
• Claiming causation from pre/post data. Describe outcomes honestly.
• Forgetting to budget for evaluation.
• No plan to use the results. Funders want to see learning, not just compliance.

Your evaluation plan becomes your reporting plan. See grant reporting and the grant report template to see how today's indicators become next year's report.