This page brings together evaluation approaches, frameworks and tools that can support planning, monitoring, evaluation and learning in complex settings. The emphasis is on resources that help teams clarify intent, choose suitable methods, make sense of evidence, and use evaluation to inform decisions over time.
Some resources provide broad evaluation guidance. Others focus on participatory methods, systems-based approaches, strategic learning, value-for-money assessment, or debates about evidence and rigour. Together, they offer practical entry points for evaluators, commissioners, facilitators and programme teams seeking approaches that fit their context.
Additional Planning, Monitoring, and Evaluation resources can be found via the site index above. Whether you’re designing a new initiative, refining a theory of change, or reflecting on outcomes, the links below provide practical guidance for choosing and using methods that fit your needs.
Key overview resources:
These resources provide broad entry points for understanding evaluation approaches, choosing suitable methods, and linking evaluation with learning and decision-making.
Magenta Book: Central Government guidance on evaluation
HM Treasury’s 2026 Magenta Book is the UK Government’s central guide to evaluation. It covers evaluation scoping, methods, data, management, use of findings and evaluation capability, with useful sections on Theory of Change, process evaluation, impact evaluation, value-for-money evaluation, benefits management and the relationship between learning and accountability. Although written for UK central government, it provides a helpful reference point for evaluators, commissioners and programme teams working in public-sector and policy settings.
BetterEvaluation
A comprehensive global platform supporting better evaluation practice through detailed guidance on evaluation approaches, frameworks, and methods. The site is organised around the full evaluation cycle and includes an extensive library of tools and techniques—ranging from theory of change and developmental evaluation to rubrics, interviews, and data visualisation. Widely used by both commissioners and evaluators, it’s a go-to resource for exploring practical options and choosing context-appropriate strategies.
UNDP Evaluation Methods Centre
This evolving UNDP resource hub brings together a wide range of evaluation methods, tools, and techniques relevant to complex development settings. It offers short, accessible summaries of approaches like outcome harvesting, contribution analysis, systems mapping, and more—each linked to practical guidance and examples. Designed for practitioners, the site helps teams choose and apply methods that suit different stages of strategy, planning, monitoring, and evaluation work.
WWF Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) Plan Guidance
This practical guide goes beyond indicator checklists to show how MEL plans can link data, learning questions, and decision-making. It balances donor accountability with program learning needs, clarifies data use pathways, and offers step-by-step support for integrating reflection and adaptation. Drawing on WWF’s global experience, it is relevant across conservation, development, and humanitarian programs.
AIDA – UNDP’s AI-powered evaluation assistant
AIDA is a new generative AI tool developed by UNDP to support evaluation use and learning. Trained entirely on nearly 7,000 UNDP evaluation reports, it allows users to ask questions and receive evidence-based answers with source citations. AIDA draws directly from thematic, project, and country-level evaluations—making it easier to explore patterns, recommendations, and lessons across large evidence sets. While it’s still evolving, AIDA offers a glimpse into how AI can support real-time reflection, learning, and sense-making in complex development and MEL contexts.
Strategic and systems-based MEL
These resources focus on evaluation approaches that support strategic learning, systems thinking, adaptive management and work in complex policy or programme settings.
Process tracing method in programme evaluation
This 2025 report by Derek Beach & Estelle Raimondo introduces process tracing (PT) as a method for evaluating complex interventions, especially those not easily measured through quantitative indicators such as knowledge work or institutional change. It explains how PT builds a causal theory, traces a process theory of change through observable evidence, and draws lessons across cases. The guide highlights strengths (clear evidence assessment, practical learning) and limitations (dependence on quality of evidence) and includes a step-by-step framework with an anonymised IEG evaluation example.
The Nonprofit Sector Has an RCT Problem
This SSIR article by Nicole Marwell and Jennifer Mosley (Fall 2025) challenges the dominance of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the nonprofit sector. It highlights how RCTs often distort organisational priorities, favour large providers, and constrain responsiveness. The authors argue instead for evaluation approaches that emphasise continuous learning, community voice, and iterative improvement better aligned with complex social change work.
Monitoring and evaluation of mission-oriented innovation policies: From theory to practice
This 2024 report by Philippe Larrue, Piret Tõnurist, and David Jonason explores effective monitoring and evaluation (M&E) frameworks for mission-oriented innovation policies (MOIPs), which operate at multiple levels with evolving boundaries. Traditional evaluation methods struggle to capture their additionality, so the report proposes tailored approaches, including mission evaluation criteria, a theory of action for developmental evaluation, and a tool for assessing mission-readiness levels. By focusing on governance, portfolio effects, and systemic impact, the report provides practical insights for policymakers, helping to refine mission design, coordination, and implementation.
Aiming for Utility in ‘Systems-based Evaluation’: A Research-based Framework for Practitioners
This 2015 IDS paper by John Grove examines the potential of system dynamics modelling (SDM) as a systems-based evaluation approach. It uses an SD model to assess the impact of antiretroviral therapy scale-up in Zambia, offering insights into applying systems-based evaluation in other contexts.
Learning by doing in natural resource management
This paper by Will Allen explores how participatory and systems-based evaluation approaches can support ongoing learning and adaptation in natural resource management. Using a New Zealand case study, it highlights the importance of iterative evaluation in complex, community-driven initiatives.
Building a strategic learning and evaluation system for your organization
This 2013 report by Hallie Preskill and Katelyn Mack presents a framework for developing a strategic learning and evaluation system. It offers guidance on making evaluation activities more systematic and intentional, ensuring they align with an organisation’s evolving needs.
Strategic learning in practice: Tools to create the space & structure for learning
This 2012 guide by Jewla Lynn explores how organisations can foster collective learning through structured processes. It introduces Theories of Change and Strategic Learning Debriefs as key tools for embedding reflective learning into decision-making. See also the 2011 report, Evaluation to support strategic learning: principles and practices, by Julia Coffman and Tanya Beer.
Investment Logic Mapping (ILM)
ILM supports the development of the strongest case for an individual investment. It identifies the major problems that the investment will be required to address, the strategic interventions and solutions that will best respond to the problem identified and the benefits that the investment will be required to deliver.
Participatory methods for reflection and learning
These methods help groups gather, interpret and use evidence through dialogue, reflection and shared sense-making.
A Field Guide to Ripple Effects Mapping
This participatory data collection method is designed to capture the impact of complex programs and collaborative processes. Well-suited for evaluating group-focused efforts, Ripple Effects Mapping involves aspects of Appreciative Inquiry, mind mapping, facilitated discussion, and qualitative data analysis. As the REM process unfolds, the intended and unintended impacts of participant efforts are visually displayed in a way that encourages discussion and engagement.
Outcome Mapping Learning Community
Outcome mapping (OM) is a methodology for planning and assessing development programming that is oriented towards change and social transformation. OM provides a set of tools to design and gather information on the outcomes, defined as behavioural changes, of the change process. OM helps a project or program learn about its influence on the progression of change in their direct partners, and therefore helps those in the assessment process think more systematically and pragmatically about what they are doing and to adaptively manage variations in strategies to bring about desired outcomes.
Value for Investment
The Value for Investment approach was developed by Julian King and colleagues to bring clarity to assessing value for money. Value for Investment brings together multiple values (e.g. social, cultural, environmental and economic) and multiple sources of evidence (qualitative and quantitative) to gain a nuanced understanding of program costs, processes, consequences and value.
The ‘Most Significant Change’ (MSC) Technique: A Guide to Its Use
This 2005 guide by Rick Davies and Jess Dart outlines MSC as a form of participatory monitoring and evaluation. It is participatory because many project actors are involved both in deciding the sorts of changes to be recorded and in analysing the data collected. Essentially, the process involves the collection of significant change (SC) stories emanating from the field level and the systematic selection of the most significant of these stories by panels of designated actors or staff. It contributes to evaluation because it provides data on impact and outcomes that can be used to help assess the performance of the program as a whole.
Evidence and complexity: rethinking rigour
These resources question narrow views of evidence quality and explore how rigour can be understood in complex, real-world settings.
Rethinking rigour to embrace complexity
This 2024 article by Marina Apgar and colleagues develops an inclusive rigour framework for evaluation in complex peacebuilding settings. Rather than defining rigour by method choice alone, it emphasises evolving methodological choices, meaningful participation and use. The paper is especially useful for thinking about how credible causal explanations can be developed under uncertainty, and how evaluation cultures, partnerships and power dynamics shape what counts as rigorous practice.
Understanding and misunderstanding randomized controlled trials
This 2018 paper by Angus Deaton and Nancy Cartwright critiques the over-reliance on RCTs, arguing that they require minimal assumptions but can be misleading if not used within a broader methodological framework. They highlight the need to combine RCTs with conceptual and theoretical development to understand ‘why things work’ rather than simply ‘what works.’
All That Glitters Is Not Gold. The Political Economy of Randomised Evaluations in Development. This 2019 paper by Florent Bédécarrats and colleagues examines the success of RCTs from a political economy perspective, questioning their dominance in development policy evaluation. The authors argue that RCTs’ appeal lies in their perceived mathematical rigour and simplicity rather than their actual applicability to complex interventions.
What role should randomized control trials play in providing the evidence base for conservation? This 2019 paper by Edwin Pynegar and colleagues discusses the role of RCTs in conservation impact evaluation. It highlights their potential benefits and limitations, noting that spillover effects and behavioural factors must be considered. The authors provide guidance on when RCTs may be an appropriate tool for conservation evaluation. See also RCTs Are Not (Always) the Answer and Why the ‘gold standard’ of medical research is no longer enough.
If you’ve found this page helpful, consider sharing it with others who might benefit too. You can also sign up for occasional site updates to hear about new tools, guides, and key resources.
[* Image: Can Stock Photo / z_amir]