Plan your project
Outcomes Evidencing Toolkit
Our Outcomes Evidencing Toolkit provides tailored suggestions for the types of evidence to collect based on your intended grant size and priority area. This will support you in developing an effective Outcomes Measurement Plan, help you meet your grant acquittal obligations, and help you communicate your impact to your stakeholders and community.
What to consider when developing your Outcomes Measurement Plan
Standards of evidence
Lotterywest recognises that formal evaluation, and gathering high-quality evidence may be costly for small grants, therefore these standards are considered proportionate to
the total grant investment into the initiative. In other words, the size of a grant will determine the level of evidence and data collection required for acquittal reporting and evaluation.
- Outcomes are identified
- Anecdotal evidence (e.g.: observation, testimonials, photographs)
- Impact Plan establishes the need and how activities achieve outcomes
- Anecdotal evidence (e.g.: observation, testimonials, photographs)
- Impact Plan
- Provides 1 method of descriptive evidence (e.g. survey, case study)
- Impact Plan
- More than 1 method of evidence OR evidence that tracks change over time
- Impact Plan
- Strong evidence using a variety of approaches that can track change over time OR assess causation
Understanding progress
Rather than data standardisation, which would require all grant recipients to collect the same data, Lotterywest has developed a Progress Rubric (see table below) to assist in understanding the outcomes and impact of Lotterywest grants. The standards of evidence and progress rubric establishes consistent definitions for evidence and impact across Lotterywest’s diverse range of grants. This is to determine the difference Lotterywest grants are achieving individually and collectively, how change is occurring, and the likelihood of sustainable change based on the evidence provided.
The Progress Rubric is how Lotterywest measures the success of an initiative at acquittal time, after the project, program or event has concluded, and final reporting is complete. This helps us to determine how impactful our grants have been, and helps us to know where we can provide support to grant seekers in the future.
This approach provides the necessary flexibility for you to design data collection that aligns to the purpose of your initiative, while also introducing a consistent framework that can be applied to understand impact across grants.
The standard of evidence provided in this toolkit incorporates three elements of quality
We know every project is different—and we don't expect you to collect the same data as everyone else. That's why we've created the Progress Rubric—a tool to help you show how your initiative made a difference, in a way that's relevant to your work and community.
The rubric outlines what we look for when assessing your final report. It helps us (and you) understand:
- What kind of change your project created
- How far along that change is
- How strong the evidence is that supports it
You can use the rubric to guide what you collect and report on—whether that's stories, stats, observations, or a mix of different data types. It gives you a flexible structure to show your progress, without needing to "tick every box."
This approach means we can fairly assess different types of projects while keeping things consistent. It also helps us understand where to offer more support in future.
We've created a simple three step wizard to help you find the right tools and resources to collect appropriate data to evidence your outcomes, making available tools, templates and resources to support you in your grant request journey.
To know more information about what evidences you’ll need to provide for your plan, start by selecting your grant size followed by the objective(s) you want to achieve with the grant and lastly, the activity type(s) that will support you in achieving your objective.
| Evidence Type | Data Source / Type | Definition | Example (Project/Grant Context) | Strength | Notes | Ease of implementation | Resources required |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Audio Evidence | Primary / Qualitative | Recordings or sound clips used to support a claim, provide proof, or document an event. | A recorded speech from a conference on climate change awareness. | Moderate | Ensure recordings are clear, contextualised, and not edited in a misleading way. | Medium | Audio capture devices. Audio editing software if required. |
| Documentary Evidence | Primary or Secondary / Qualitative or Quantitative | Written records or documents used in the process of delivering an initiative. | A formal grant acquittal or evaluation detailing expenditures and project milestones. | Strong | Ensure documents are credible, accurately maintained, and free from bias. | Easy | Means to store documentation, and digitise paper documentation where needed. |
| Photographic/Video Evidence | Primary / Qualitative | Visual images or recordings used to support an argument or to document events. | Before-and-after photos of community spaces revitalised through a funded urban renewal project. | Moderate | Ensure authenticity and provide context to prevent misinterpretation. | Easy | Image capture devices, means to store images and integrate into reporting. |
| Physical Evidence | Primary / Qualitative | Tangible objects or materials that are relevant to proving a fact or claim. | Materials produced through a literacy program, such as workbooks or student projects. | Moderate | Requires proper documentation to demonstrate relevance to project outcomes. | Medium | Storage for physical evidence, means to capture and communicate evidence digitally. |
| Operational data | Primary / Quantitative | Evidence generated by the activities of an initiative. | Data showing that a grant-funded food relief program distributed 10,000 meals to low-income families. | Moderate | Useful to know how much of an outcome may have occurred, but is often a measure of outputs. | Medium | Existing systems to pull data from software to analyse data. |
| Online Analytics | Secondary / Quantitative | The collection and interpretation of digital data from websites, social media, and other online platforms. | Tracking website traffic to measure the effectiveness of an online marketing campaign. | Moderate | Provides real-time data but requires proper tools and expertise for analysis. | Medium | Existing systems to pull analytic data from. Software to analyse data. |
| Evidence Type | Data Source / Type | Definition | Example (Project/Grant Context) | Strength | Notes | Ease of implementation | Resources required |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analogical and textual evidence | Secondary / Qualitative | Information derived from texts written by others, to infer success of a project based on existing theoretical links. | Comparing the success of a funded community garden project in one region to a similar program in another region. | Moderate | Ensure analogies are based on meaningful similarities and avoid oversimplifications. May be difficult to find evidence of other similar initiatives. Must use sound premises and avoid fallacies. | Easy | Evidence from similar projects. |
| Expert Testimony | Secondary / Qualitative | Statements or opinions provided by individuals who are qualified experts in a particular field. | A child psychologist providing expert opinion on the effectiveness of a funded early childhood intervention program. | Weak | Expert opinions should be cross-checked with empirical data to avoid reliance on single or subjective perspectives. | Easy | Resources to pay for the expert’s time. Data for them to analyse. |
| Testimonials and anecdotes | Primary / Qualitative | First-hand accounts or statements from individuals describing their experiences or opinions, demonstrating a project’s direct impact. | A refugee who completed a language support program providing a testimonial on how it helped them secure employment. | Weak | Personal and compelling but lacks generalisability and should be supplemented with data. | Easy | Time to capture anecdotes. |
| Surveys | Primary / Qualitative or Quantitative | A structured method of data collection that involves asking a set of questions to a group of people. Used to systematically collect feedback from participants, beneficiaries, stakeholders, or the wider community. | A pre- and post-program survey measuring changes in knowledge and attitudes after a financial literacy workshop. | Strong | Can reach a large sample size but relies on respondent honesty and effective, unbiased question design. | Medium | Time for survey design, implementation and analysis. Digital platform or paper forms for data collection. Software for analysis. |
| Case studies | Primary / Qualitative | In-depth investigations of a single instance, event, organisation, or individual. Often used to highlight success and impact. | A case study on a single family whose quality of life improved due to a housing assistance grant. | Strong | Useful for storytelling and detailed analysis but not broadly generalisable. | Medium | Framework for capturing case studies. Time to capture and communicate case studies. |
| Interviews | Primary / Qualitative | One-on-one conversations where an interviewer asks a respondent a series of questions. Can be structured (fixed questions), semi-structured (some flexibility), or unstructured (free-flowing conversation). | Interviewing program beneficiaries to understand how a job training grant improved their employment prospects. | Strong | Allows for deep insights but can be time-consuming and interviewer bias should be managed. | Hard | Time for conducting interviews, transcription and analysis. Audio capture device. Guidance for conducting interviews. Transcription and analysis software. |
| Focus groups | Primary / Qualitative | Small group discussions guided by a moderator to explore opinions and attitudes on a specific topic. | A focus group with parents discussing how a funded after-school program has affected their children’s well-being and academic success. | Strong | Encourages diverse perspectives, but group dynamics can influence responses. | Hard | Time to conduct focus groups, transcription and analysis. Guidance for conducting valid focus groups. Transcription and analysis software. |
| Sensor and Biometric Data | Primary / Quantitative | Objective measurements of physical or environmental change. | Air quality sensors showing reduced pollution levels after an environmental grant-funded tree planting in urban areas. | Strong | Highly accurate but may require specialised equipment and data privacy considerations. | Hard | Specialist equipment. Specialist skills to set up, maintain and analyse data. |
Why Are You Collecting Data? Choose Your “A”
Before you begin, it's important to know why you're collecting data. Your purpose will guide what evidence you need, how to collect it, and what to do with it.
The 5 Common Purposes of collecting data:
|
Purpose |
What It Means |
Example Use |
|---|---|---|
|
Advocacy |
You're making the case for an issue or showing the value of your work. |
Promoting your project to decision-makers or the public. |
|
Allocation |
You want to direct resources to what works best—within your org or for funders. |
Deciding where to invest more time, money, or people. |
|
Analysis |
You're figuring out what's working, how, and why. |
Improving your initiative or preparing it for expansion elsewhere. |
|
Accountability |
You're meeting funding requirements or showing you've delivered what you promised. |
Reporting to Lotterywest or other funders. |
|
Actualisation |
You're empowering your community or team—especially through inclusive data and learning approaches. |
Supporting Indigenous data sovereignty, co-design, or staff development. |
Learn about wellbeing
Understand how your community is going to help you to better target and plan your project.
Not sure where to start?
Find inspiration for your project and browse the initiatives and grants already making their mark on wellbeing in Western Australia.
Acknowledgement of Country
The Western Australian Community Impact Hub acknowledges and pays respect to the Traditional Owners of the land on which we are based, the Whadjuk people of the Noongar Nation and extends that respect to all the Traditional Owners and Elders of this country. We recognise the significant importance of their cultural heritage, values and beliefs and how these contribute to the positive health and wellbeing of the whole community.