Evaluation works by making comparisons. A common approach is to compare how clients’ lives change over time, for example by collecting data on various results of interest when they begin working with a paralegal (known as baseline data), after they receive documentation, and ideally some time later, when important outcomes linked to legal status may have occurred, such as acquiring land titles or enrolling in school. This approach requires the collection of data at multiple points in time, via surveys or other structured data collection processes. Take time during the program design phase to think through how and when you will go about collecting data, and how you will evaluate it. This is vital for understanding how and whether your program works. If a less formal approach to monitoring and evaluation is adopted, it is still important to think carefully about how you can take stock of and review your work periodically. Channeling lessons learned about performance and impact back into program planning is an essential element of the program cycle, and must involve the communities your program serves and bring their feedback on board. CASE STUDY ADRA Thailand takes all possible steps to track the number of stateless people obtaining Thai nationality. Project staff regularly follow up with district offices, stateless individuals, and heads of villages to seek this information. However, ADRA does not receive direct notifications and therefore has to recognize the limitations of its data. Some programs have dedicated monitoring and evaluation staff who perform this task, while others ask paralegals to do it. Academics and external impact evaluation organizations .such as Innovations for Poverty Action, Evidence in Governance and Politics, and the World Bank’s Development Impact Evaluation can also perform this function. These experts assist in developing research questions and evaluation strategies and generally support more complex methods than in-house monitoring and evaluation can. On the other hand, external partners have their own needs. If you do not want public scrutiny of the results, you should not partner with an entity that plans to publish academic papers or other reports of their examination of your program. Common methods of gathering data for monitoring and evaluations include: •S  urveys of clients and the wider community. These can be administered at initial consultations, in meetings with officials and community leaders, and after clients have received services. •F  ollow-up calls and site visits to seek clients’ opinions, observe proceedings, and learn of ID document outcomes. •F  ocus groups in which clients or other members of the community answer questions about their experiences and perceptions. • Anonymous suggestion boxes. •Q  ualitative research projects. Such projects would typically require outside evaluators and might examine such questions as the effects of paralegal service on empowerment. (See the sample questions below.) •C  ase management databases allowing real-time tracking of statistics across a caseload, such as Salesforce, CaseBox or Wingu. See 5.3 Collecting, Managing, and Using Data for a discussion of databases. •  Comparing data gathered with outcomes among the non-client population. This might involve comparing clients’ results with existing population data. DISCRIMINATION EMPOWERMENT SUSTAINABILITY DATA RELATED RESOURCES (EXTERNAL) RELATED SECTIONS (WITHIN) A C O M M U N I T Y- B A S E D P R A C T I T I O N E R ’ S G U I D E : D O C U M E N T I N G C I T I Z E N S H I P A N D OT H E R F O R M S O F L E G A L I D E N T I T Y | 57