Case study design worksheet

Designing selection reasons and source combinations beforehand is key to credible analysis.

When to use this worksheet and what completion involves Fictional completed example

EvalCompass Worksheet

Case study design worksheet

Method: Case Study

Designing selection reasons and source combinations beforehand is key to credible analysis.

Research questions and design

Enter questions and basic design

Completed example for this section (fictional)

This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.

Evaluation questions in why/how form: How were plans used at work?
Case definition: individual / organization / project, etc.: Organizational plan-use processes over 3 months after training
Single- or multiple-case design: Multiple cases
Multiple-case count and rationale: 2 organizations with differing meetings and staff transfers (fictional)

Reason for this entry: Use organizational processes, not only people, as analysis units.

Evaluation questions in why/how form

Case definition: individual / organization / project, etc.

Single- or multiple-case design

Multiple-case count and rationale

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

Enter questions and basic design

Use organizational processes, not only people, as analysis units.

View the method explanation

Writing tips

Follow each field’s heading to record the program name, focus, period, and other details. Leave undecided matters clearly marked as unresolved.

Read the full fictional example

Case selection plan

Record each selection reason and strategy

Completed example for this section (fictional)

This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Pseudonymous case ID	Typical / critical / deviant / maximum variation strategy, etc.	Selection rationale	Main characteristics and context
Organization A	Contrasting case selection	Examine regular-meeting processes	Monthly meetings and stable staff
Organization B	Contrasting case selection	Examine handover barriers	Staff changes

Reason for this entry: Select from context, not only after seeing outcomes.

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Pseudonymous case ID	Typical / critical / deviant / maximum variation strategy, etc.	Selection rationale	Main characteristics and context

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

Record each selection reason and strategy

Select from context, not only after seeing outcomes.

View the method explanation

Writing tips

Keep the information in each row aligned. Scroll wide tables horizontally to see every column.

Read the full fictional example

Collection protocol

Design sources for each case

Completed example for this section (fictional)

This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Source type	Collection means	Targets and quantity	Correspondence to evaluation questions
Meeting records	Extract references to plans	3 months per organization (fictional)	Sequence leading to use
Interviews	Semi-structured interviews with staff	Start with 1 person per organization and consider additions	Reasons and alternative explanations

Reason for this entry: Add targets according to evidence gaps.

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Source type	Collection means	Targets and quantity	Correspondence to evaluation questions

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

Design sources for each case

Add targets according to evidence gaps.

View the method explanation

Writing tips

Keep the information in each row aligned. Scroll wide tables horizontally to see every column.

Read the full fictional example

Analysis plan

Enter procedures and analytical-generalization approach

Completed example for this section (fictional)

This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.

Build timelines and seek contradictory records in each organization. Organize next testing hypotheses from differences; do not calculate general success rates.

Reason for this entry: Compare pathways and conditions.

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

Enter procedures and analytical-generalization approach

Compare pathways and conditions.

View the method explanation

Writing tips

Use the example as a reference and record what you have established about your own program. Distinguish assumptions and unchecked matters from confirmed facts.

Read the full fictional example

Design checks

Check before collection

Completed example for this section (fictional)

This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.

☑ Checked: Selection reasons documented
☑ Checked: Planned multiple sources needed per question and organized comparison scope and limits
☑ Checked: Protocol developed and shared by all staff
☑ Checked: Database naming and storage agreed
☑ Checked: Agreed to disclose analytical rather than statistical generalization and limitations

Reason for this entry: These are fictional design checks, not confirmation that actual evidence collection is complete.

Selection reasons documented
Planned multiple sources needed per question and organized comparison scope and limits
Protocol developed and shared by all staff
Database naming and storage agreed
Agreed to disclose analytical rather than statistical generalization and limitations

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

Check before collection

These are fictional design checks, not confirmation that actual evidence collection is complete.

View the method explanation

Writing tips

Read each item and check those you have confirmed. Do not use the fictional example’s checkbox states as findings about your own program.

Read the full fictional example

Before writing, check when to use the worksheet and what completion involves

Case study design worksheet is a worksheet for applying Case Study in meetings or individual work. For the overall duration of the method, use “Illustrative planning durations, not common standards: design 2–4 weeks, collection per case 1–4 weeks, analysis 3–6 weeks” as a reference, adjusting for scale and resources. Fill in what you know provisionally and leave unresolved matters as questions to check next.

When this worksheet is useful

Explain processes and contexts behind outcomes or their absence
Compare successful and unsuccessful implementation across areas or organizations
Trace complex mechanisms difficult to capture statistically

Participants and preparation

Evaluators examining cases and stakeholders. Set case numbers from questions, comparisons and resources for depth in each.

Bring the materials used for decisions, existing data, and differing stakeholder views to help complete the worksheet.

Suggested order

1. Research questions and designEnter questions and basic design
2. Case selection planRecord each selection reason and strategy
3. Collection protocolDesign sources for each case
4. Analysis planEnter procedures and analytical-generalization approach
5. Design checksCheck before collection

Signs the worksheet is ready for review

Case study protocol
Case database: raw data and notes
Summaries for each case

Cautions for review

Convenience selection without reasons weakens credibility. Make strategy explicit.
Do not finalize explanations from one source. Plan multiple sources needed for questions and specify comparison scope and limits; documents and interviews are one possible combination.
Do not stop at storytelling. Structure summaries as answers with explicit evidence.

Guides to read before starting

Read a completed fictional example (your entries will not change)

Fictional example; not actual results

A fictional illustration tracing plan use after training in organizations A and B.

Research questions and design

Evaluation questions in why/how form: How were plans used at work?
Case definition: individual / organization / project, etc.: Organizational plan-use processes over 3 months after training
Single- or multiple-case design: Multiple cases
Multiple-case count and rationale: 2 organizations with differing meetings and staff transfers (fictional)

Reason for this entry: Use organizational processes, not only people, as analysis units.

Case selection plan

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Pseudonymous case ID	Typical / critical / deviant / maximum variation strategy, etc.	Selection rationale	Main characteristics and context
Organization A	Contrasting case selection	Examine regular-meeting processes	Monthly meetings and stable staff
Organization B	Contrasting case selection	Examine handover barriers	Staff changes

Reason for this entry: Select from context, not only after seeing outcomes.

Collection protocol

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Source type	Collection means	Targets and quantity	Correspondence to evaluation questions
Meeting records	Extract references to plans	3 months per organization (fictional)	Sequence leading to use
Interviews	Semi-structured interviews with staff	Start with 1 person per organization and consider additions	Reasons and alternative explanations

Reason for this entry: Add targets according to evidence gaps.

Analysis plan

Build timelines and seek contradictory records in each organization. Organize next testing hypotheses from differences; do not calculate general success rates.

Reason for this entry: Compare pathways and conditions.

Design checks

☑ Checked: Selection reasons documented
☑ Checked: Planned multiple sources needed per question and organized comparison scope and limits
☑ Checked: Protocol developed and shared by all staff
☑ Checked: Database naming and storage agreed
☑ Checked: Agreed to disclose analytical rather than statistical generalization and limitations

Reason for this entry: These are fictional design checks, not confirmation that actual evidence collection is complete.

Common errors in judgment

Conclude effectiveness from successes alone

How to revise: Include non-achievement cases and state selection reasons

Reason: This examines differing success and failure conditions.

Report 50% success because one of two cases succeeded

How to revise: Report a comparison of two case processes

Reason: Purposive cases are not a random population sample.

Editorial and checking information

Content updated: 2026-10-07Source checked: 2026-09-13 (includes AI cross-checking)No documented human reviewIncludes fictional examplesEditorial policy and scope of checking Cite this page Report a correction

References and checked sections

Case Study Evaluations
U.S. General Accounting Office · 1990
Section consulted
Chapter 4: Data Collection and Analysis
How it relates to the text
Test provisional interpretations with additional information and examine contradictory facts.
Source checked: 2026-09-13 (includes AI cross-checking)

How to cite this page

EvalCompass Editorial Team. “Case study design worksheet”. EvalCompass, updated 2026-10-07. https://evalcompass.jun-nakatani.com/en/worksheets/case-study/

Add the date you accessed the page. Text created by this site is available under CC BY 4.0. Quotations, external materials, and bundled fonts have their own terms of use. When reusing content, credit the source, link to the license, and indicate any changes.

Suggest a correction or improvement to this page

Change history

2026-09-13 — Checked sources for definitions and conditions and added fictional examples, judgment rationales and completed entries for every field. Revised unsupported historical or uptake claims. Reviewed procedures and cautions, adjusting fixed counts, thresholds and institutional generalizations. Preserved field positions, types and counts while revising fixed conditions and thresholds.
2026-10-07 — Made minimal corrections to categorical or fixed conditions and worksheet/example inconsistencies based on content check FW-09. Preserved field counts, order, labels and section structure. Unconfirmed sources' check status was not changed.