Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood Local Evaluation Technical Assistance (HMRF-LETA)

Status: Original and derived artifacts are available for this document.

Download: docx | pdf | html

HMRF-LETA EVALUATION PLAN TEMPLATE
Purpose of this document
This template is for Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood (HMRF) grantees selected by the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) Office of Family Assistance (OFA) to conduct a local evaluation. It explains what to include in your evaluation plan and how to organize it so reviewers can see that your plan is clear, complete, and based on a strong research design.
The template includes:
    • A glossary of evaluation design types to help you choose the right design and describe your methods.
    • An outline with guidance for each section of the plan.
    • Instructions on what to include in the narrative and as visuals, along with helpful tips.
    • Table shells with examples.
Drafting guidance
You already have a lot of what you need to get started! In June, you submitted an application for local evaluation supplemental funding that described your proposed evaluation at a high level. For this template, you can copy text, tables or figures from that application and paste them into each section. Throughout this template, we have provided references to relevant sections of your application. 
When pasting text, use "Paste as Plain Text" (Ctrl+Shift+V on Windows or Cmd+Shift+V on Mac) to match the template's formatting. For tables, use the table shells provided in each section and enter your information directly into them. Do not paste tables from your application, as formatting may not transfer correctly and column headers may not match what this template requires. Remember to use the prompts and guidance in each section of this template to confirm you include all requested details, and add any missing details to ensure your plan is clear, complete, and feasible.
Depending on your evaluation type, you may be focusing on program delivery, measurement development, descriptive outcomes, or program impacts. Use design-specific guidance in each section to tailor your responses to your evaluation type. Focus on the guidance that applies to the evaluation type you are proposing; you may skim or skip guidance on other evaluation types that do not apply. If you propose more than one evaluation type (e.g., outcome and implementation), tailor your responses to capture all proposed evaluation types and clearly distinguish between them where needed.
The accompanying HMRF‑LETA Planning Tools compiles resources, templates, tools, and examples to create evaluation plan components like logic models, participant flow diagrams, data collection plans, and power analyses. You may use these tools if they are helpful. 
Formatting guidance:
    • Use the Word Normal style for all narrative text.
    • Use Word Table Text style for all tables to keep formatting consistent. 
    • You may use bold for sub-headings to organize content within sections.
    • Use APA style for all in-text citations and list all cited sources in Section VII References.
    • The plan should be about 15 to 20 pages, single-spaced, not counting appendices. 
Reach out to the local evaluation TA help desk at [email protected] with questions about the plan guidance or the template. Getting questions resolved early will simplify the drafting process. 
Submission guidance
If you are conducting evaluations under more than one HMRF grant (e.g., FORGE, HEART, Ready4Life), submit a separate evaluation plan for each grant.
Submit your plan in two phases: 
    (1) First draft: An initial draft plan by [DUE DATE].
    (2) Final draft: A final plan that addresses previous feedback by [DUE DATE].
For each submission, please submit a completed evaluation plan that is ready for review by your Local Evaluation Technical Assistance (LETA) team and OFA Family Assistance Program Specialist (FPS). Ideally, have your plan edited and read by a few different people before you submit it. This will minimize the number of editorial comments your LETA team and FPS will need to provide and will help them focus on content and technical details. 
Send your plan by email to your FPS and LETA team as a Word document using this naming convention: LclEvPlan_[Grantee Name_MM.YYYY - plan draft date]. Keep the guidance in each section of the template when you submit your initial draft. The guidance is for your use while planning. Remove the guidance only when your plan is final and ready to submit to OFA on [DUE DATE] date].

Glossary of evaluation terms
This glossary explains terms that are key to your evaluation.
Evaluation types
Formative evaluations examine programs or program components during early implementation to identify strengths and weaknesses and guide improvements before full implementation. Formative evaluation methods often overlap with implementation evaluation methods, but their primary purpose is to inform refinement during early implementation. Use this design when your program or a program component is new or adapted and you want to inform improvements to the program or program component before full implementation. E.g., adding a new financial literacy module to an existing program and identifying what is working and what needs adjustment before rolling it out fully.
Implementation (or process) evaluations assess whether a program or program component was delivered as intended, who participated, what services they received, and how staff implemented activities. It focuses on fidelity, reach, and quality of delivery. Use this design when you want to understand if the program was delivered as intended and identify ways to improve operations. E.g., checking if all planned sessions were offered and whether participants attended.
Measurement evaluations develop or adapt and test ways to measure outcomes, such as creating a new composite scale or adapting an existing instrument for a new population or setting. Use this design when current measures do not adequately capture what your program needs to assess or when improving measurement would be valuable for future programming and research. E.g., creating a composite score for parenting confidence by combining several survey items and testing whether the score is consistent and accurate.
Outcome evaluations measure whether the program or program component achieved its intended results (e.g., better communication or stronger relationships). Such studies can be descriptive or can measure impacts, depending on whether you include a comparison group.
Descriptive outcome evaluations measure changes in participants after receiving program services, but do not show whether the program caused the changes. A common approach compares outcomes before and after the program, but other descriptive methods (e.g., using multivariate regression to examine associations between program dosage and outcomes) may also be used. Use this design when you want to describe changes among participants but cannot include a comparison group. E.g., measuring parenting confidence before and after a workshop.
Impact evaluations assess whether the program or program component caused the changes in outcomes. Such studies compare people who got the program or program component (treatment group) to similar people who did not (comparison group). Impact evaluations include designs such as randomized controlled trials (RCTs), where participants are randomly assigned to treatment or control groups, and quasi-experimental designs (QEDs), which use matching or other methods to create comparable groups. Use this design when you need convincing evidence that the program or program component caused the changes you observed. E.g., comparing employment rates for fathers who attended job workshops with those of a similar group of fathers who did not. 
Outcome types
Confirmatory outcomes are pre-specified measures identified before data collection and analyzed using planned methods to test hypotheses. These are the most important outcomes for assessing whether a program or program component worked. E.g., if you hypothesize that fathers in the program will increase engagement with their child compared to those not in the program, a confirmatory outcome could be the number of hours fathers spent with their child in the past 30 days. Use these outcomes to test pre-specified hypotheses with planned methods.
Exploratory outcomes are measures analyzed without pre-specified plans to generate new hypotheses or explore unexpected patterns. They are useful for learning but provide less rigorous evidence than confirmatory outcomes. E.g., if a Ready4Life program notices that participants seem to report reduced stress after completing financial coaching, they could examine stress reduction as an exploratory outcome alongside their confirmatory outcomes. Use these outcomes to identify new patterns or questions that were not planned in advance.
Other key terms
Analysis sample is the group of participants included in the final analysis after accounting for missing data or attrition.
Attrition is the loss of consented participants from a study over time. High attrition can bias results if those who drop out differ from those who stay. 
Comparison refers to what the program or program component is being compared to in an evaluation. If the evaluation includes a comparison group, this term refers to the alternative condition or services received by that group (e.g., no services, usual services, or a different program component). This concept is especially important for impact evaluations, which require a comparison group. 
Community engagement in research is a collaborative approach in which researchers, organizations, and community members impacted by the research work together to ensure the research reflects community priorities, experiences, and needs. In an evaluation, community engagement strengthens relevance, improves trust and participation, and helps ensure findings are meaningful and useful to programs and the people they serve. For guidance on incorporating community engagement into your evaluation design, see the HMRF-LETA resource Using Community Engagement to Strengthen Your Evaluation.
Control group is a type of comparison group created through random assignment. People in the control group do not receive the program or program component being studied during the evaluation period. In some studies (such as waitlist designs), the control group may be offered the program after the evaluation period ends. Control groups are most commonly used in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
Evaluator is the individual or team responsible for designing, conducting, and reporting on the local evaluation. Evaluators ensure objectivity, follow ethical standards, and protect participant privacy while producing high-quality evidence. In general, evaluators may be external or internal to the organization delivering the program. HMRF-LETA local evaluations must be conducted by an external evaluator. 
An external evaluator is an evaluator who is independent from the organization delivering the program. The external evaluator may be employed by a separate organization or by a different department within the same university, provided there is no supervisory or implementation role in the program being evaluated. External evaluators help maintain impartiality and reduce potential conflicts of interest. 
Grantees are the entities awarded an HMRF grant from OFA. They are responsible for implementing the grant-funded program and, if awarded supplemental funding, overseeing the local evaluation.
Interventions are the specific program components being studied in the local evaluation. E.g., a new curriculum module, an enhanced case management approach, or an added virtual workshop option.
Logic models are visual representations of how programs are expected to work, showing the relationships between resources, activities, outputs, and short- and long-term outcomes. In an evaluation plan, a logic model clarifies the program’s theory of change, aligns activities with intended results, and helps identify appropriate research questions and measures. 
Organizations are entities that house and operate the HMRF program. An organization may be the same entity as the grantee or a partner agency delivering services.
Outcome domains are groups of related outcome measures that reflect the same broader construct (e.g., parenting skills, healthy co-parenting, or economic stability). 
Programs are the full set of services and activities funded by the HMRF grant. Programs often include multiple components (e.g., workshops, case management, employment services) designed to achieve the grant’s goals. 
Research questions are the specific questions your evaluation is designed to answer. They guide every aspect of your evaluation, including your data collection, measures, and analysis plan. Strong research questions are focused, feasible to answer with available data, and directly relevant to your program and population. Evaluations typically include a small number of primary research questions, which address the core goals of the evaluation, and may include secondary research questions, which address related topics of interest. 
Subgroup analysis examines whether program effects differ for specific groups. Use this type of analysis when describing plans to explore differences among groups of participants.


[Optional - add a graphic or logo]
Evaluation of [Intervention Name] in [Geographic Area]
Evaluation Plan for [Grantee Organization]
Grant type: [Enter one: HEART, FORGE, or Ready4Life]

[Date]

Prepared by
[Authors’ names and their organizational affiliations]













 I. Evaluation design
A. Intervention description	
Purpose 
    • Describe the intervention you will evaluate. Related application section: #1 Program or Program Component.
Instructions
    • Overview. Explain what the intervention is and how it fits within your broader HMRF program. If you are evaluating only one component of your program, describe that component only.
    • Development or adaptation. State whether the intervention is new or adapted. If new, explain why you developed it. If adapted, describe what you changed and why.
    • Delivery. Describe who will deliver the intervention, how often it will be offered, and how long participants will receive it.
    • Alignment with evaluation type.
    • For descriptive outcome studies, describe what you will offer to evaluation participants.
    • For impact studies, describe what you will offer to each study group. 
    • For implementation and formative studies, describe how you plan to deliver the intervention. 
    • For measurement studies, describe the measure you are developing or adapting and why it is needed.
[Start writing here.]

B. Evaluation goals
Purpose 
    • Explain why your evaluation matters and what it will contribute to the HMRF field. Related application section: #3 Research Questions.
Instructions
    • Purpose. Describe why you are conducting this evaluation. 
    • Research context. Very briefly summarize relevant research. Ensure the research relates to the people your program serves. Identify the gap(s) your evaluation will address. If little or no research exists, state that clearly and explain how your evaluation will help fill the gap. List all cited research in Section VII. 
    • Contribution. Explain how the evaluation will produce useful information for your community, participants, programs, researchers, or policymakers. Note if this is the first time your program or population has been studied.
    • Alignment with evaluation type. 
    • For descriptive outcome evaluations, explain how results will show program progress. 
    • For impact evaluations, explain how results will strengthen evidence about program effectiveness.
    • For implementation evaluations, explain how findings will help improve program delivery. 
    • For formative evaluations, explain how findings will help refine the intervention before full implementation. 
    • For measurement evaluations, explain how results will help practitioners and researchers use the measure. 
Tips 
    • Connect your goals to the people your program serves.
    • Align your goals with your research questions in Section I.D.
[Start writing here.]
C. Community input on evaluation design	
Purpose 
    • Describe how community input informed (or will inform) your evaluation plan. Related application sections: #2 Description of Community Partnerships and #13 Author of the Evaluation Proposal and Community Input on the Proposal.
Instructions
    • Approach. Describe whether and how you gathered (or will gather) community input during evaluation planning. 
    • Influence. Describe how community input shaped (or will shape) key decisions such as research questions, data collection methods, or recruitment strategies. Focus only on input related to the evaluation plan. 
[Start writing here.]

D. Evaluation research question(s)	
Purpose 
    • List the research questions your evaluation will answer. Related application section: #3 Research Questions.
Instructions
    • Introduction. Include a brief introductory sentence. E.g., “This section describes our evaluation’s research questions.” 
    • Research questions table. Complete Exhibit I.D to list each research question and related details. Include subgroup research questions, if applicable.
    • Alignment with evaluation type.
    • For descriptive outcome evaluations, focus on changes in outcomes and do not imply causality.
    • For impact evaluations, focus on comparing outcomes between groups to test causal effects.
    • For implementation and formative evaluations, focus on how the intervention was delivered and experienced.
    • For measurement evaluations, focus on how well the measure performs. 
Tips
    • Write questions that are clear, specific, answerable, and relevant. 
    • You must address every listed question in your final report, so include only questions you can answer with available data, time, and resources. 
    • Limit confirmatory outcomes to one per outcome domain (e.g., relationship quality, parenting skills, communication skills, financial self-sufficiency skills) and no more than three to five total. Remember that confirmatory outcomes are set before data collection and cannot be changed later. Align them with your main evaluation goals.
    • Ensure questions are meaningful for the people your program serves.
    • Not all research questions need to focus on participant outcomes. In implementation, formative, and measurement evaluations, research questions may focus on processes, outputs, or measure properties. 
[Start writing here.]


Exhibit I.D Research questions
Research Question Number
Research Question
Target population (enter “N/A” if not applicable) 
Intervention being studied
Outcome (enter “N/A” if not applicable)
Outcome timing (enter “N/A” if not applicable)
Outcome type (enter “N/A” if not applicable)
Example: RQ1
How many participants complete the program within eight weeks of entering the program?
All fathers
Parenting workshop
Program completion rate
Eight weeks after program entry
Exploratory
Example: RQ2
Does participation in the program’s  financial coaching sessions improve financial self-sufficiency skills three months after program exit?
All youth
Financial Coaching sessions
Financial self-sufficiency skills
Three months after program exit
Confirmatory
Example: RQ3
Do older couples (ages 25+) show greater improvement in relationship skills than younger couples (ages 18–24) immediately after participating in the program?
All couples
Healthy relationship education workshops
Relationship skills
Immediately after program exit
Exploratory
RQ1






RQ2







E. Hypotheses
Purpose
    • State what you expect to find. Related application section: #3 Research Questions.
Instructions
    • Introduction. Begin with a brief introductory sentence. E.g., “This section describes our evaluation’s hypotheses.” 
    • Hypotheses table. Complete Exhibit I.E. to list each hypothesis alongside the related research question number listed in Exhibit I.D. Include hypotheses about expected differences across subgroups, if applicable.
    • Alignment with evaluation type.
    • For descriptive outcome evaluations, describe expected patterns without implying causality.
    • For impact evaluations, describe expected differences in outcomes between groups.
    • For implementation and formative evaluations, describe what you expect to learn about program implementation. 
    • For measurement evaluations, describe expected measure performance and benchmarks. 
Tips 
    • Write hypotheses that are clear and measurable. 
    • Make sure each hypothesis aligns with a research question listed in Section I.D. and the logic model in Section I.F below.
[Start writing here.]
Exhibit I.E Hypotheses
Research Question Number
Hypothesis
Example: How many participants complete the program within eight weeks of entering the program?
At least 75% of enrolled participants will complete the program within eight weeks of entering the program.
Example: Does participation in the program’s  financial coaching sessions improve financial self-sufficiency skills three months after program exit?
Youth  in the treatment group will have significantly higher financial self-sufficiency skills three months after program exit compared to youth in the comparison group.
Example: Do older couples (ages 25+) show greater improvement in relationship skills than younger couples (ages 18–24) immediately after participating in the program?
Older couples (ages 25+) will show greater improvement in couples’ relationship skills than younger couples (ages 18–24) 
RQ1

RQ2


F. Evaluation logic model
Purpose
    • Present your evaluation’s logic model.
Instructions
    • Introduction. Begin with a brief introductory sentence. E.g., “This section presents our evaluation’s logic model.” 
    • Logic model diagram. Include a diagram in Exhibit I.F. that shows inputs (resources), activities, outputs (services delivered), short-term outcomes, and long-term outcomes. Use arrows to show how these elements connect. See the HMRF-LETA Planning Tools for resources, templates, and examples. 
    • Alignment with evaluation type.
    • For descriptive outcome evaluations, show how activities lead to expected changes in outcomes.
    • For impact evaluations, show how activities lead to expected differences in outcomes between groups. 
    • For implementation and formative evaluations, show the intended flow from activities to outputs. 
    • For measurement evaluations, show the measure connects to activities or outcomes. 
Tips 
    • Use clear labels and make the diagram easy to read.
    • Adapt the logic model from your grant application.
[Start writing here.]
Exhibit I.F. Logic model

G. Evaluation type and design
Purpose
    • Describe how your study design will answer your research questions. Related application section: #4 Evaluation Type and Design.
Instructions
    • Evaluation type. State your evaluation type (descriptive, impact, implementation, formative, or measurement). 
    • Study design. Briefly describe your study design. 
    • Rationale. Explain why this design is appropriate for your research questions.
    • Limitations. Acknowledge key design limitations and describe how you will address them.
    • Alignment with evaluation type.
    • For descriptive evaluations, describe the design, such as pre–post or repeated measures.
    • For impact evaluations, identify the design, such as a randomized controlled trial or quasi-experimental design, and describe the causal contrast you will estimate. You will describe the comparison or control condition and the assignment or selection approach later in the plan. 
    • For implementation and formative evaluations, describe how you will learn from program delivery.
    • For measurement evaluations, describe how you will test whether the measure performs as intended. 
Tips 
    • Make sure your evaluation type aligns with your evaluation goals and research questions.
[Start writing here.]

a. (Impact evaluations only) Description of the control or comparison groups
Purpose
    • Describe the comparison or control condition. Related application section: #4 Evaluation Type and Design.
Instructions
    • Group formation method. Identify how you will form the comparison or control group (e.g., random assignment or propensity score matching). You will provide full details later in Section II.A. 
    • Participant experience. Describe what participants in the comparison or control group will experience, including available services. Explain how this will differ from the treatment group. 
    • Delayed intervention. If you plan to offer the intervention to the comparison or control group later, describe this plan. Explain why the length of the delay is appropriate and why it will not compromise your evaluation. 
[Start writing here.]

H. Evaluation sample 
Purpose
    • Describe who or what is included in the evaluation sample. Related application section: #5 Description of Population/Participants.
Instructions
    • Evaluation sample. Describe who or what will contribute data to the evaluation. 
    • Alignment with evaluation type.
    • For descriptive outcome and impact evaluations, the sample usually includes program participants. For impact evaluations, the sample also includes a control or comparison group, whose members may not receive program services but still contribute data to the evaluation. 
    • For implementation and formative evaluations, the sample may include program participants, program staff, sessions, or program documents and data. 
    • For measurement evaluations, the sample may include program participants or other respondents needed to test the measure. 
    • Unit of analysis and eligibility. If you are using participant data, specify the unit of analysis, such as individual, couple, or family, and describe eligibility criteria.
    • Comparison to program population. State whether the evaluation sample is the same as the program population. If it differs, explain how and why.
Tips
    • If you are using participant data, describe only who contributes data. You will describe recruitment procedures later in Section II.
[Start writing here.]

I. Data sources
Purpose
    • Describe the data sources you will use to answer your research questions. Related application section: #8 Data the Evaluation will Collect.
Instructions
    • Introduction. Begin with a brief introductory sentence (e.g., “This section describes our evaluation data sources.”) 
    • Data sources table. Complete Exhibit I.I to describe the data sources you will use to answer each research question.
Tips
    • Explain how you will link multiple data sources, if applicable.
    • If you need a data sharing agreement, describe how and when you will obtain it or note if one is already in place.
[Start writing here.]
Exhibit I.I Data sources for each research question
Research Question Number
Primary or Secondary Data
Data Source
(Administrative data only) Data sharing agreement required?
Example: RQ1
Primary
nFORM pre- and post- surveys
No
Example: RQ2
Secondary
Child support records from the state agency
Yes
Example: RQ3
Primary
Participant focus group notes
No
RQ1



RQ2




II. Evaluation enrollment
Purpose
    • Describe how you will recruit participants and keep them in the evaluation. Related application sections: #5 Description of the populations/participants involved, #6 Timing of Data Collection, and #7 Number of Participants Involved/Evaluated.
Instructions
    • Recruitment. Describe how you will recruit participants for the evaluation. Identify who is responsible, the role of community partners, and any incentives you will offer. 
    • Consent. Briefly describe how and when you will obtain consent for evaluation activities, and who is responsible.
    • Recruitment challenges. Identify expected recruitment challenges and how you will address them.
    • Sample size justification. Explain how you chose your sample size goals and why they are sufficient for your evaluation design. Explain how your goals are realistic and attainable by describing program capacity and including relevant data such as past enrollment numbers or participation rates. If you plan subgroup analyses, explain how your sample size supports those analyses.
    • Retention. Describe how you will keep enough participants in the evaluation to meet your sample size goals. Identify anticipated retention challenges and how you will address them.
    • Participant flow. Include a flow chart in Exhibit II.1 that shows how participants will move through recruitment, enrollment, and consent into the evaluation. See the HMRF-LETA Planning Tools for resources, templates, and examples.
    • Sample size table. Complete Exhibit II.2 to show what sample sizes you expect to achieve overall, by year, and by subgroup (if applicable). If you expect the estimated analytic sample to vary by outcome measure (e.g., outcomes measured using administrative records vs. survey data), you may duplicate the table and label each version by outcome measure. 
Tips 
    • If you are working with schools, justice-involved populations, or other special populations, describe any special procedures or approvals needed for recruitment or informed consent. Section V (Human Subjects Protection) is where you will explain how you will protect study participants and get Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval to include these groups. 
    • If your design includes multiple research groups, describe how you will recruit and retain participants in each group.
    • The estimated analytic sample sizes Exhibit II.2 should align with your estimated attrition rates in Exhibit III.A.2.
    • For impact evaluations, focus only on evaluation enrollment and retention; you will describe study group formation later in Section II.A.
[Start writing here.]
Exhibit II.1 Participant flow through the evaluation
[Insert flowchart as image file]
Exhibit II.2a Sample size and estimated attrition (descriptive evaluations only)
Year
Estimated initial sample size
(# of individuals enrolled in the evaluation)
Estimated analytic sample size
(# of individuals at analysis)
Example: Year 1
200
120
Year 1


Year 2


Year 3


Year 4


Total


Exhibit II.2b Sample size and estimated attrition (impact evaluations only)
Year
Estimated initial sample size 
(# of individuals enrolled in the evaluation)
Estimated analytic sample size 
(# of individuals at analysis)

Treatment
Comparison
Treatment
Comparison
Example: Year 1
100
100
80
70
Year 1




Year 2




Year 3




Year 4




Total




A. (Impact evaluations only) Methods to develop study groups 
Purpose
    • Explain how you will form the treatment and control or comparison groups. Related application sections: #4 Evaluation type and design and #7 Number of Participants Involved/Evaluated.
Instructions
    • Group formation method. Describe how you will select or assign participants to study groups, such as random assignment or matching.
    • Random assignment. If you are using random assignment, explain who will do it and how and when it will happen. Specify the unit of randomization, the method used, and any stratification or blocking. Explain how participants will be informed of their assignment. Describe how you will monitor compliance and minimize crossover between groups. Describe the metrics and methods you will use to show the groups are similar at baseline.
    • Matching. If you are using matching, describe how you will identify the comparison group. Explain how and when you will form the treatment and comparison groups. Describe the steps you will take to make the groups similar. Describe the metrics and methods you will use to show the groups are similar at baseline.
    • Other methods. If using another method, describe the approach and explain why it is suitable for your research questions.
    • Power analysis table. Complete Exhibit II.A.1 to report the results from your power analysis. See the HMRF-LETA Planning Tools for resources, templates, and examples. 
    • Power analysis summary. Summarize the results of your power analysis. Describe key assumptions, including expected effect sizes and their sources, such as prior studies or meta-analyses.
[Start writing here.]
Exhibit II.A.1 Power analysis (impact evaluations only)
Confirmatory outcome name
Outcome type (continuous/ binary)
Sample size
Significance level
Power
Minimum Detectable Effect Size (MDES) 
Example: communication skills
Continuous
200
0.05
80%
0.25



















III. Data collection
A. Data collection procedures
Purpose
    • Describe how you will collect data to answer your research questions. Related application sections: #6 Timing of Data Collection and #8 Data the evaluation will collect.
Instructions
    • Data collection plan table. Complete Exhibit III.A.1 to list data collection procedures for each data source you will use in your evaluation, including timing, method, and the responsible party.
    • State whether follow-up timing is post-baseline, post-random assignment, or post-program completion (e.g. six months after baseline or 12 months after random assignment). 
    • Identify the data collection method and any incentives. If using surveys, note whether you will use nFORM surveys, and/or local evaluation surveys. 
    • Identify who will collect data.
    • Alignment with evaluation type.
    • For descriptive outcome evaluations, explain how you will collect outcome data consistently across time points.
    • For impact evaluations, explain how you will collect outcome data consistently across study groups. If using a quasi‑experimental design, explain how you will collect data from the comparison group if group members do not receive program services. 
    • For implementation evaluations, describe how you will collect information on program implementation.
    • For formative evaluations, describe how you will collect information on early program implementation.
    • For measurement evaluations, describe how you will collect data to test measure performance.
    • Response rates and attrition. If you are collecting follow-up data, state your response rate goals for each wave of data collection. Describe how you will track participants and encourage follow-up survey completion. If you have more than one research group, describe how you will monitor differential attrition, i.e., how attrition rates vary for each research group. 
    • Attrition table. Complete Exhibit III.A.2 to report the estimated attrition rates for each wave of data collection. See the HMRF-LETA Planning Tools for resources, templates, and examples. 
Tips 
    • Describe any additional procedures required in school or justice settings.
    • If you are collecting data from multiple respondents (e.g., couples), explain how you will handle situations where only one person responds.
    • Limit follow-ups to two timepoints and focus on collecting high-quality data at reasonable intervals. 
[Start writing here.]
Exhibit III.A.1 Data collection plan
Data Source
Timing 
Method 
Responsible party 
nFORM survey
Pre- and post-intervention 
Online 
Program staff (Local evaluator will monitor continuously for data completeness) 
Local evaluation survey
Pre-, post-intervention, 3 months following the end of the program 
In-person survey
Local evaluation staff 








Exhibit III.A.2 Estimated attrition 
Data collection wave
Estimated number of responses
Estimated Attrition Rate
Enrolled in evaluation

N/A
Completed baseline survey


Completed 1st follow-up


Completed 2nd follow-up (if applicable)


Note: To calculate the attrition rate, use the number of non-responses as the numerator and the number who enrolled in the evaluation as the denominator. 

B. Measures 
Purpose
    • Describe the measures you will use for each research question and how you will construct them. Related application section: #8 Data the Evaluation Will Collect.
Instructions
    • Measures table. Complete Exhibit III.B to list each outcome measure, including a description, corresponding data source, and reliability/validity.
    • For qualitative data, describe the key constructs and how you will measure. Explain how you will ensure measures are culturally and linguistically appropriate.
    • For standard instruments, provide the instrument name, citations, and available reliability and validity evidence. For non-standard instruments, describe how you will assess reliability and validity. Note how you plan to handle measures that do not meet your reliability or validity benchmarks (e.g., whether you will exclude them from analysis or report findings with caveats).
    • Alignment with evaluation type.
    • For descriptive outcome and impact evaluations, measures may include participant outcomes and qualitative measures such as interview responses, focus group findings, or observational data that provide context for or help explain quantitative findings.
    • For implementation and formative evaluations, measures may include quantitative or qualitative indicators of fidelity, reach, quality of delivery, and participant or staff experiences.
    • For measurement evaluations, you may provide details on the new or adapted measures, including reliability and validity benchmarks.
[Start writing here.]
Exhibit III.B Measures
Measure 
Description
Source
Reliability and Validity 
If a standard instrument, provide a citation.
If you use a non-standard instrument, explain how you will check reliability and validity.
Example 1:
Father/child engagement skills 
Composite score calculated by adding survey items (range 0 to 5). The number of items and the range for the composite score vary by the age of the child.
nFORM 
Dyer, J., Kaufman, R., Fagan, J., Pearson, J., Cabrera, N. (2018). Measures of father engagement for nonresident fathers. Family Relations, 67, 381-398. 
Example 2: Parenting confidence
Composite score (range 0 to 5) calculated by averaging 8 custom survey items (range 0 to 5) on confidence in caregiving tasks.
Local evaluation survey
Will conduct expert review for content validity and calculate Cronbach’s alpha (goal ≥ 0.70) for internal consistency.
Example 3: Participant feedback on workshops
Themes of successes and challenges identified by thematically coding qualitative data from focus groups.
Post‑session focus group notes
Use of a semi‑structured discussion guide; use of a codebook; double-coding of qualitative data










IV. Data analysis 
Purpose
    • Briefly describe how you will analyze the data to answer your research questions. Related application section: #9 Initial Ideas on Data Analysis.
Instructions
    • Analysis approach. For each research question, briefly describe the analytic approach you will use (e.g., pre–post comparisons, regression analysis, thematic coding), the analytic sample, and any planned subgroup analyses. Briefly note key analytic limitations, if applicable.
    • Alignment with evaluation type.
    • For descriptive outcome evaluations, describe how you will summarize and compare outcomes. 
    • For impact evaluations, describe the statistical approach you will use to estimate program impacts and account for baseline differences. Note how you will minimize Type I error (finding positive impacts by chance), e.g., by limiting the number of confirmatory tests or using multiple-comparison adjustments.
    • For implementation and formative evaluations, describe how you will analyze data on program implementation. 
    • For measurement evaluations, describe how you will examine measure performance, including benchmarks (e.g., reliability thresholds).
Tips
    • Note how you will handle missing data, including participants who complete some but not all data collection waves or who provide partial survey responses.
[Start writing here.]
V. Human subjects protection
Purpose
    • Document how the evaluation will protect participants, obtain approval from an Institutional Review Board (IRB), and comply with federal regulations. Related application section: #12 IRB.
Instructions
    • Human subjects protections. Describe how you will protect participants during data collection and analysis. Include consent procedures (and parental consent/youth assent, if applicable), and describe any processes or staff trainings related to participant privacy and data security. 
    • IRB review. Identify the IRB that will review this evaluation and describe the anticipated timeline for submission and approval. If you do not plan to seek IRB review, explain why and describe how you reached that decision (e.g., an IRB or institutional official confirmed it).
    • Federal-Wide Assurance (FWA) documentation. An FWA confirms that an institution agrees to comply with HHS regulations for the protection of human subjects (45 CFR part 46). State whether your institution has a current FWA. If yes, provide the FWA number and expiration date. You will include a copy of your FWA approval letter in Appendix B. If no, describe how and when you will obtain one. 
[Start writing here.]
VI. Evaluation timeline
Purpose
    • Show when major evaluation activities will occur. Related application section: #10 Evaluation Timeline. 
Instructions
    • Introduction. Begin with a brief introductory sentence. E.g., “This section describes our evaluation timeline and key milestones.” 
    • Timeline table. Complete Exhibit VI.A to list start and end dates for key evaluation activities. You may add rows as needed to reflect your evaluation type.
    • (Optional) You may also include a Gantt chart, if helpful. See the HMRF-LETA Planning Tools for resources, templates, and examples to help you create one.
    • Alignment with evaluation type.
    • For descriptive outcome and impact evaluations, indicate when you will collect and analyze participant outcome data.
    • For impact evaluations, include key milestones such as random assignment and baseline data collection.
    • For implementation and formative evaluations, indicate when you will collect and analyze program implementation data.
    • For measurement evaluations, include time for measure development and testing before full data collection. 
Tips  
    • Ensure the timeline aligns with the program schedule and funding period.
    • Build in sufficient time for IRB approval before beginning data collection.
    • If working across multiple sites, note any differences in timing by location.
    • For evaluations that include participant data, complete enrollment early enough to allow sufficient time for follow-up data collection, analysis, and report writing. Build in additional time for longer follow-up periods, which may delay survey completion and preparation of the final analytic sample
[Start writing here.]
Exhibit VI.A Evaluation timeline
Evaluation activity 
Start date
End date
IRB submission (enter “N/A” if not applicable)


Staff training


Evaluation enrollment (if conducting an impact evaluation, specify evaluation enrollment dates for treatment and comparison groups)


Baseline data collection 


1st follow-up data collection (enter “N/A” if not applicable)


2nd follow-up data collection (enter “N/A” if not applicable)


Interview data collection (enter “N/A” if not applicable)


Focus group data collection (enter “N/A” if not applicable)


Analysis plan submission


Analysis period


Report writing


Report submission


Data archiving


Please enter additional responses if applicable.



VII. References
Purpose
    • Provide full citations for all sources cited in this evaluation plan. 
Instructions
    • Sources. List every source cited in the plan, including published research articles, instruments or scales used in data collection, validation studies for measures, and internal program documents or unpublished materials.
    • Citation style. Use American Psychological Association (APA) style. Include complete details, including author(s), year of publication, title of the work, publication name, and link, if available.
Tips 
    •  List references alphabetically by the first author’s last name.
[Start writing here.]

VIII. Appendices
A. Evaluation team qualifications
Purpose
    • Show the qualifications and roles of key evaluation staff. Related application section: #11 Local Evaluator.
Instructions
    • Evaluator. Identify the external evaluator(s) conducting this evaluation. Describe their role and explain how they are independent from the organization delivering the intervention.  
    • CVs. Include curriculum vitae for the evaluation’s Principal Investigator or Research Project Director and up to four key evaluation staff. 
    • Highlights. In each CV, highlight education, relevant publications, and relevant experience, including experience conducting local evaluations of federal grants, especially HMRF grants, and experience working with your program’s target population.
[Paste in CVs.]

B. Federal-Wide Assurance
Purpose
    • Document compliance with federal regulations for protecting human subjects. 
Instructions
    • If you have a Federal-Wide Assurance (FWA), include a copy of your institution’s FWA approval letter. 
[Start writing here.]