Evaluation question worksheet

Gather information needs broadly and select main questions in light of use, resources and deadlines. The number of questions in existing fields is a design guide, not a requirement. Check judgment criteria and research feasibility rather than question count.

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

EvalCompass Worksheet

Evaluation question worksheet

Method: Key Evaluation Questions

Basic information

Enter the evaluation overview and purpose

Completed example for this section (fictional)

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

Program and evaluation name: Community counseling service (fictional)
Primary evaluation users (who will use it): Service manager and next-year budget officer
Evaluation purpose (formative / summative): Formative: improving intake arrangements
Evaluation period: September–November 2026

Reason for this entry: Confirm the intended users and deadline first.

Program and evaluation name

Primary evaluation users (who will use it)

Evaluation purpose (formative / summative)

Evaluation period

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

Enter the evaluation overview and purpose

Confirm the intended users and deadline first.

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

Gather information needs

List what each stakeholder wants to know

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

Stakeholder	Information needed (candidate questions)	Priority (high / medium / low)
Users and non-users	Can people seek counseling at current hours using current application methods?	High
Counseling service manager	What burdens would changing intake create?	High

Reason for this entry: Prioritize information needs directly linked to decisions.

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Stakeholder	Information needed (candidate questions)	Priority (high / medium / low)

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

List what each stakeholder wants to know

Prioritize information needs directly linked to decisions.

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

Key evaluation question (KEQ) list

Enter the selected main questions and judgment criteria. Adjust question numbers to the intended use.

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

#	Key evaluation question (KEQ)	Subsidiary questions (2–3)	Judgment criteria (what counts as sufficient)
1	To what extent does the current service reach people needing counseling?	Who uses or does not use it? / What conditions prevent use?	Can explain alignment with the target population and barriers that can be removed
2	Which aspects of intake should be improved?	Which hours are preferred? / Can staffing accommodate them?	Can select revisions based on both user preferences and feasibility

Reason for this entry: Distinguish questions supporting judgments from supplementary questions for data collection.

Scroll horizontally to view the table

#	Key evaluation question (KEQ)	Subsidiary questions (2–3)	Judgment criteria (what counts as sufficient)

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

Enter the selected main questions and judgment criteria. Adjust question numbers to the intended use.

Distinguish questions supporting judgments from supplementary questions for data collection.

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

Reasons for selecting KEQs

Explain why these questions were selected and which were excluded and why

Completed example for this section (fictional)

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

To choose opening hours and booking methods at the December budget meeting, focus on 2 questions about reach and operations. Design an evaluation of long-term changes in living conditions at another time.

Reason for this entry: The number of questions follows this evaluation’s intended use, not a fixed correct answer.

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

Explain why these questions were selected and which were excluded and why

The number of questions follows this evaluation’s intended use, not a fixed correct answer.

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

Completion checklist

Completed example for this section (fictional)

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

☑ Checked: KEQs are focused on the necessary scope given use, resources and deadlines
☑ Checked: Each KEQ has subsidiary questions
☑ Checked: Judgment criteria are explicit for each KEQ
☐ Not checked: The commissioner and key stakeholders have agreed
☑ Checked: Formative and summative questions are appropriately balanced

Reason for this entry: This example focuses on 2 questions according to intended use. Final stakeholder agreement is scheduled for the next meeting.

KEQs are focused on the necessary scope given use, resources and deadlines
Each KEQ has subsidiary questions
Judgment criteria are explicit for each KEQ
The commissioner and key stakeholders have agreed
Formative and summative questions are appropriately balanced

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

This example focuses on 2 questions according to intended use. Final stakeholder agreement is scheduled for the next meeting.

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

Evaluation question worksheet is a worksheet for applying Key Evaluation Questions in meetings or individual work. For the overall duration of the method, use “Illustrative estimate (adjust for scale and staffing): half a day to 1 day (including stakeholder discussion)” 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

Agreeing on evaluation focus and scope with stakeholders early in planning
Developing shared understanding of purpose and deliverables between the commissioner and evaluator
Selecting hypotheses or pathways to evaluate after completing a logic model or ToC

Participants and preparation

Primary evaluation users, program officers, participant representatives and evaluators. Select members to include the interests and perspectives needed.

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

Suggested order

1. Basic informationEnter the evaluation overview and purpose
2. Gather information needsList what each stakeholder wants to know
3. Key evaluation question (KEQ) listEnter the selected main questions and judgment criteria. Adjust question numbers to the intended use.
4. Reasons for selecting KEQsExplain why these questions were selected and which were excluded and why
5. Completion checklist

Signs the worksheet is ready for review

KEQ list with rationale and judgment criteria for each question
Agreed evaluation design document (incorporated into the terms of reference)

Cautions for review

Too many improvement questions push judgment and accountability questions aside
KEQs are too abstract, such as “Was the program effective?”, to translate into a measurement plan
Questions become leading because the commissioner’s preferred answer or advocacy is an implicit premise

Guides to read before starting

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

Fictional example; not actual results

The following fictional example reviews next year’s intake arrangements because continued service use is low.

Basic information

Program and evaluation name: Community counseling service (fictional)
Primary evaluation users (who will use it): Service manager and next-year budget officer
Evaluation purpose (formative / summative): Formative: improving intake arrangements
Evaluation period: September–November 2026

Reason for this entry: Confirm the intended users and deadline first.

Gather information needs

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Stakeholder	Information needed (candidate questions)	Priority (high / medium / low)
Users and non-users	Can people seek counseling at current hours using current application methods?	High
Counseling service manager	What burdens would changing intake create?	High

Reason for this entry: Prioritize information needs directly linked to decisions.

Key evaluation question (KEQ) list

Scroll horizontally to view the table

#	Key evaluation question (KEQ)	Subsidiary questions (2–3)	Judgment criteria (what counts as sufficient)
1	To what extent does the current service reach people needing counseling?	Who uses or does not use it? / What conditions prevent use?	Can explain alignment with the target population and barriers that can be removed
2	Which aspects of intake should be improved?	Which hours are preferred? / Can staffing accommodate them?	Can select revisions based on both user preferences and feasibility

Reason for this entry: Distinguish questions supporting judgments from supplementary questions for data collection.

Reasons for selecting KEQs

Reason for this entry: The number of questions follows this evaluation’s intended use, not a fixed correct answer.

Completion checklist

☑ Checked: KEQs are focused on the necessary scope given use, resources and deadlines
☑ Checked: Each KEQ has subsidiary questions
☑ Checked: Judgment criteria are explicit for each KEQ
☐ Not checked: The commissioner and key stakeholders have agreed
☑ Checked: Formative and summative questions are appropriately balanced

Reason for this entry: This example focuses on 2 questions according to intended use. Final stakeholder agreement is scheduled for the next meeting.

Common errors in judgment

Judging success solely by how many people used the service

How to revise: Also ask whether intended participants were reached and why some were not

Reason: Counts do not explain the quality of reach or barriers to access.

Listing every questionnaire item as a main evaluation question

How to revise: Arrange main judgments and the smaller questions that answer them hierarchically

Reason: This avoids confusing evaluation focus with data collection items.

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

Identifying evaluation questions
Australian Institute of Family Studies · 2019
Section consulted
How to develop evaluation questions; Process questions / Outcome questions
How it relates to the text
Distinguishing process questions from outcome questions separates implementation issues from outcome issues.
Source checked: 2026-09-13 (includes AI cross-checking)

How to cite this page

EvalCompass Editorial Team. “Evaluation question worksheet”. EvalCompass, updated 2026-10-07. https://evalcompass.jun-nakatani.com/en/worksheets/evaluation-questions/

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 — Updated explanations to correspond to the sources and added method-specific fictional completed examples, judgment examples and a change log.
2026-10-07 — Made minimal corrections to categorical claims, fixed conditions or inconsistencies between the worksheet and examples based on content check FW-04. Preserved field numbers, order, labels and section structure. Did not change the verification status of unchecked materials.