🎯 Demo Dashboard This is a mock impact report built from a project report. Includes an AI Impact Assistant — interact with your data, create infographics & ask queries. ImpactDash can build this for your project, customised to your data and branding. Contact us to get started. 🎯 Demo Dashboard This is a mock impact report built from a project report. Includes an AI Impact Assistant — interact with your data, create infographics & ask queries. ImpactDash can build this for your project, customised to your data and branding. Contact us to get started.
Research Design

Research

Theory of change, research framework, methodology, and study participant details for the 2025 Impact Assessment.

Programme Logic

Theory of Change

The programme theory articulates how project inputs and activities are expected to lead to outcomes and long-term impact through a clear results chain.

📥

Inputs

Funding, technical support, field team, partner network, curriculum, training resources, community institutions

⚙️

Activities

Livelihood support, skill training, education sessions, mentoring, community mobilisation, institutional linkage

📤

Outputs

Participants trained, students supported, households reached, groups formed, institutions engaged

Outcomes

Improved income, employability, learning, confidence, participation, decision-making, coordination

🌟

Impact

Sustainable livelihoods, improved life opportunities, stronger community resilience, inclusive development

Programme Logic Narrative

The project theory assumes that when underserved communities receive coordinated, multi-sector support across livelihoods, skills, education, and institutional strengthening, they are able to address overlapping barriers simultaneously — creating compounding improvements across household resilience, employability, learning, and social participation.

Critical assumptions include: community willingness to participate, availability of appropriate markets and employers, functional institutional partners, and sufficient project duration for behaviour change to take root. The assessment examined the extent to which these assumptions held across the project's geographic coverage and target groups.

Evaluation Design

Research Framework

📋 Assessment Objectives

  • Assess the extent to which project objectives were achieved across all five themes
  • Capture evidence of outcome change among project participants and stakeholders
  • Identify factors enabling or constraining programme effectiveness
  • Assess sustainability and scale potential of project outcomes
  • Generate actionable recommendations for future programming

❓ Key Research Questions

  • To what extent did the project improve household income and resilience?
  • Were skill training graduates able to transition into meaningful employment?
  • What changes in learning outcomes are attributable to the education component?
  • How has women's participation, agency, and confidence changed?
  • Are institutional systems in place to sustain project outcomes?

📊 Evaluation Domains

Livelihoods Skilling & Employment Education & Learning Women's Empowerment Institutional Strengthening Sustainability Equity & Inclusion

Each domain was assessed using a combination of quantitative indicators, qualitative narratives, and stakeholder perceptions to build a holistic evidence picture.

🔬 Analytical Lenses

  • Equity lens: Disaggregation by gender, age, caste, and geography
  • Sustainability lens: Assessment of community ownership and institutional capacity
  • Convergence lens: Multi-theme participation and compounding outcomes
  • Value for money: Cost-effectiveness and efficiency of delivery
Data Collection

Research Methodology

The assessment employed a mixed-methods design, integrating quantitative and qualitative data streams to build a comprehensive evidence base across all five thematic areas.

📋

Household Surveys

Structured questionnaires administered to 1,200 randomly sampled households across 12 districts, covering income, assets, livelihoods, health, and programme exposure.

👤

Participant Surveys

Outcome surveys administered to 1,800 direct programme participants across all thematic components, measuring change on pre-defined outcome indicators.

📖

Student Learning Assessments

Structured assessments of literacy and numeracy administered to 2,500 students in project schools, using standardised tools adapted to local curricula.

👥

Focus Group Discussions (FGDs)

60 FGDs conducted with women's groups, youth cohorts, SHG members, parent groups, and community stakeholders across all three states.

🎤

Key Informant Interviews (KIIs)

120 KIIs with project staff, institutional representatives, employers, community leaders, teachers, and government officials to gather contextual and programmatic insights.

📝

Case Studies

24 in-depth case studies documenting individual and community-level change stories, selected through purposive sampling to represent diverse profiles and outcomes.

📂

Programme Data Review

Analysis of project MIS data, attendance registers, placement records, financial records, and monitoring reports to triangulate quantitative findings.

👁️

Observation Visits

Field visits to 45 project sites including training centres, schools, community groups, livelihood enterprises, and institutional partners across all three states.

Sample Profile

Study Participants

A total of 2,500 respondents participated across all data collection streams of the assessment.

2,500 Total Respondents
800 Livelihood Participants
600 Skilling Participants
700 Education Stakeholders
1,100 Women Participants
150 Teachers / Trainers
250 Community Stakeholders
3 States Covered
12 Districts Covered

Gender Profile

Female
58%
Male
42%

Age Profile

18–28
38%
29–40
34%
41–55
20%
55+
8%