Hi @Adam_Fearnall. This is such an interesting topic. I didn’t include this in my first presentation of the 101 material i’m developing, but it actually came up as a question during the webinar. I feel like this is a much bigger topic, but it’s obviously a concern for many.
I can only speak to OTF’s approach. We ask most grantees to collect one or two metrics (some are also required to use a standardized survey), and that’s because we need to understand on a larger scale the impact of our work. We also need to demonstrate to our funder the value of our work. Those aren’t (by and large) negotiable. However, grantees can ask for funds to engage in their own evaluation as part of their budget, and the purpose of that evaluation is entirely to their discretion. If tactics change, and therefore the evaluation needs to be updated, then that’s entirely within the power of the grantee to do so (with the caveat that once the grant is made, we can’t change the budget, so additional evaluation funds from OTF aren’t possible). The one thing that wouldn’t be ok to change is the outcome of the work (aligned with OTF’s grant result). This should remain constant.
Generally, I would add that as a funder, we want our grantees to succeed, since you’re the ones doing the work that’s so important for so many communities. We understand that things change as the work evolves, so please talk to your program manager.
I hope this was helpful. It’s definitely making me re-consider if the topic should be added to the 101 presentation, so thanks for weighing-in!