Before starting any impact evaluation, consider the key issues concerning resources and constraints and only start an evaluation if these questions can be answered satisfactorily.
- Does the institution have sufficient resources (e.g. direct or in-kind funding) to conduct an evaluation? Issues to consider may include the burden associated with data collection for both students and practitioners, ethics, likely response rates, level of engagement and the possible impact that data collection may have on the programme and student outcomes.
- When is the evaluation report needed and can the evaluation realistically deliver within this timescale? In the context of higher education, the academic calendar (i.e. holidays) should be considered alongside the nature of the data collection required and the timeframe of the evaluation.
- Do the institution’s staff have the necessary expertise (i.e. knowledge and skills) and capacity (i.e. time and resources)?
Small n impact evaluation designs should be considered when one or more of the following are true:
- There is one case or a small number of cases. (A case could be an organisation as well as a person).
- There is no option to create a counterfactual or control group.
- There is considerable heterogeneity in the population receiving the intervention, the wider context of the intervention or the intervention itself. Such heterogeneity would make it impossible to estimate the average treatment effect using a traditional counterfactual evaluation as the different sub-groups will be too small for statistical analysis (White and Phillips 2012).
- There is substantial complexity in the programme being evaluated, meaning that an evaluation designed to answer the question ‘does the programme cause outcome X’ may make little sense, whereas an evaluation design that recognises that the programme being evaluated is just one ingredient in a ‘causal cake’ may make more sense.
Befani (2020) has developed a tool to choose appropriate impact evaluation methodologies. It covers a wide range of ‘small n’ impact methods as well as ‘traditional’ counterfactual evaluation designs. We strongly recommend that you familiarise yourself with this tool and use it as an aid to decide which small n impact evaluation methodology to use.
For all the small n methodologies described here, an important starting point is to develop a detailed Theory of Change.