Outcome description and substantiation card
Use 1 card per outcome. Focus on whose behavior changed, and record affected people's or third parties' statements and documents as evidence.
Outcome description and substantiation card
Basic information
Outcome card identification
Completed example for this section (fictional)
This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.
- Program name
- Improve consultation coordination (fictional)
- Outcome ID: sequential number
- OH-01
- Reporting period
- April–September 2026
- Completed by and date
- Evaluator A / September 13, 2026
Reason for this entry: Assign an ID identifying the description.
Writing tips and explanation for this section
About this section
Outcome card identification
Assign an ID identifying the description.
View the method explanationWriting 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 exampleOutcome description
Describe which social actor changed behavior, how, when and where. Do not record outputs such as satisfaction or participant counts.
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
| Social actor: individual, organization or group | Specific behavior change | Time and place of change | Overview of the process leading to change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Partner consultation desk B | Introduced advance contact with referral destinations after obtaining the person's consent | August 2026, desk B | B revised internal procedures after a study session examining interrupted referrals. |
Reason for this entry: Describe behavior of actors outside the program as outcomes.
Scroll horizontally to view the table
| Social actor: individual, organization or group | Specific behavior change | Time and place of change | Overview of the process leading to change |
|---|---|---|---|
Writing tips and explanation for this section
About this section
Describe which social actor changed behavior, how, when and where. Do not record outputs such as satisfaction or participant counts.
Describe behavior of actors outside the program as outcomes.
View the method explanationWriting tips
Keep the information in each row aligned. Scroll wide tables horizontally to see every column.
Read the full fictional exampleSubstantiation
Record evidence of the change and program contribution. Include substantiators independent of the intervention who know about both, and record independence, verification coverage and disagreements in the evidence field.
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
| Evidence type: statement, document, observation, etc. | Evidence content or quotation | Source: name / role / date |
|---|---|---|
| Revised document | August referral procedures added advance contact, a summary of a fictional document. | Desk B's public procedures, August |
| Verification by an independent informant | Referral destination C confirmed advance contact started and explained that an earlier institutional review also contributed. | Manager at destination C, not a program participant, September |
Reason for this entry: Retain disagreements and other factors rather than relying only on stakeholders' self-reports.
Scroll horizontally to view the table
| Evidence type: statement, document, observation, etc. | Evidence content or quotation | Source: name / role / date |
|---|---|---|
Writing tips and explanation for this section
About this section
Record evidence of the change and program contribution. Include substantiators independent of the intervention who know about both, and record independence, verification coverage and disagreements in the evidence field.
Retain disagreements and other factors rather than relying only on stakeholders' self-reports.
View the method explanationWriting tips
Keep the information in each row aligned. Scroll wide tables horizontally to see every column.
Read the full fictional exampleProgram contribution
Describe how the program was involved in this change. Express it as contribution rather than attribution.
Completed example for this section (fictional)
This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.
Reason for this entry: Limit contribution claims to what evidence supports.
Writing tips and explanation for this section
About this section
Describe how the program was involved in this change. Express it as contribution rather than attribution.
Limit contribution claims to what evidence supports.
View the method explanationWriting 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 exampleQuality check
Completed example for this section (fictional)
This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.
- ☑ Checked: Whose behavior changed is explicit
- ☑ Checked: Did not mislabel outputs as outcomes
- ☑ Checked: Included independent, knowledgeable substantiators and recorded independence, verification coverage and disagreements
- ☑ Checked: Contribution is described as contribution, not sole cause
Reason for this entry: A fictional completed analysis including independent verification.
Writing tips and explanation for this section
About this section
A fictional completed analysis including independent verification.
View the method explanationWriting 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 exampleBefore writing, check when to use the worksheet and what completion involves
Outcome description and substantiation card is a worksheet for applying Outcome Harvesting in meetings or individual work. For the overall duration of the method, use “Illustrative estimate, adjusted to scale and staffing: 2–6 months for design, collection, substantiation and analysis, depending on scale” 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
- Evaluating interventions with unpredictable outcomes, such as advocacy, policy change or network building
- When identifying whose activities contributed to which changes in complex multi-partner programs
- When retrospectively organizing what actually changed after a program ended
Participants and preparation
1–2 evaluators or facilitators, program staff providing information and descriptions, external substantiators interviewed, and stakeholders in interpretation sessions
Bring the materials used for decisions, existing data, and differing stakeholder views to help complete the worksheet.
Suggested order
- 1. Basic informationOutcome card identification
- 2. Outcome descriptionDescribe which social actor changed behavior, how, when and where. Do not record outputs such as satisfaction or participant counts.
- 3. SubstantiationRecord evidence of the change and program contribution. Include substantiators independent of the intervention who know about both, and record independence, verification coverage and disagreements in the evidence field.
- 4. Program contributionDescribe how the program was involved in this change. Express it as contribution rather than attribution.
- 5. Quality check
Signs the worksheet is ready for review
- Outcome register: descriptions, substantiation and contribution
- Pattern analysis report
- Change map, an optional visualization
Cautions for review
- Omitting substantiation and treating collection and description as completion produces merely a self-reported list.
- Confusing outcomes with outputs. Conducting training or submitting a report is not an outcome.
- Overclaiming contribution as attribution damages credibility. Consistently use appropriate wording such as “The program was one factor contributing to the change.”
Read a completed fictional example (your entries will not change)
A fictional illustrative example verifying a report that referral procedures changed after a support organization's study session.
Basic information
- Program name
- Improve consultation coordination (fictional)
- Outcome ID: sequential number
- OH-01
- Reporting period
- April–September 2026
- Completed by and date
- Evaluator A / September 13, 2026
Reason for this entry: Assign an ID identifying the description.
Outcome description
Scroll horizontally to view the table
| Social actor: individual, organization or group | Specific behavior change | Time and place of change | Overview of the process leading to change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Partner consultation desk B | Introduced advance contact with referral destinations after obtaining the person's consent | August 2026, desk B | B revised internal procedures after a study session examining interrupted referrals. |
Reason for this entry: Describe behavior of actors outside the program as outcomes.
Substantiation
Scroll horizontally to view the table
| Evidence type: statement, document, observation, etc. | Evidence content or quotation | Source: name / role / date |
|---|---|---|
| Revised document | August referral procedures added advance contact, a summary of a fictional document. | Desk B's public procedures, August |
| Verification by an independent informant | Referral destination C confirmed advance contact started and explained that an earlier institutional review also contributed. | Manager at destination C, not a program participant, September |
Reason for this entry: Retain disagreements and other factors rather than relying only on stakeholders' self-reports.
Program contribution
Reason for this entry: Limit contribution claims to what evidence supports.
Quality check
- ☑ Checked: Whose behavior changed is explicit
- ☑ Checked: Did not mislabel outputs as outcomes
- ☑ Checked: Included independent, knowledgeable substantiators and recorded independence, verification coverage and disagreements
- ☑ Checked: Contribution is described as contribution, not sole cause
Reason for this entry: A fictional completed analysis including independent verification.
Common errors in judgment
Treating creation of training materials as an outcome
How to revise: Record how recipients' behavior changed.
Reason: Distinguish outputs from social change.
Treating program staff approval as completed substantiation
How to revise: Also check with independent sources knowledgeable about the change.
Reason: A process addressing self-report bias is necessary.
References and checked sections
- Outcome harvestingRicardo Wilson-Grau et al. / BetterEvaluation
- Section consulted
- Steps in the process; 4. Substantiate; Principles
- How it relates to the text
- During substantiation, check with people independent of the intervention who know about the change and contribution.
How to cite this page
Change history
- — Updated explanations to correspond with sources, and added method-specific fictional worksheet examples, judgment examples and revision history.
- — Made minimal corrections to assertions, fixed conditions or inconsistencies between worksheets and examples based on content check FW-03. Preserved field counts, order, labels and section structure. Did not change verification status of unchecked material.