Writing For Nonprofit Reports

Too many early-career researchers think they only have two options after receiving comments from reviewers: Obey everything blindly or risk instant rejection. That’s not how strong authors play the game. We've had an insightful session in our research community with one of the managing editors earlier this week, where we learnt what editors actually want to see when reviews are mixed. Here is what we've learnt from our guest : - You answer every comment with respect, even when the reviewer clearly didn’t read the paper - You adopt all valid points and show exactly what changed in the manuscript - You calmly disagree where needed, and back it up with data, logic, or literature. Some journals already have the following process in place: - Editorial teams do throw out AI‑generated or clearly invalid reviews - Authors can appeal when a reviewer obviously didn’t read the paper - A thoughtful, well‑argued response letter can tip the balance when reviews conflict. So next time you get: Reviewer A: “Great, minor changes” Reviewer B: “Fundamentally flawed, reject” Reviewer C: “Interesting but needs language/structure work” Don’t panic. Do the work: fix everything that is fair ask from reviewers, document it clearly, and explain with evidence where you disagree. Editors are not looking for obedient authors. They are looking for serious scholars who can defend their work and engage constructively with feedback. #research #publishing #academia #scientist #science #professor #phd #postgraduate #thesis

We recently did "lookbacks" to see how well 2 recent GiveWell grants met our initial expectations. 1 went better than expected, 1 went worse. More on what we learned ⤵️ 1️⃣ Since 2020, we've given ~$120m to New Incentives for cash incentives to get kids vaccinated in Nigeria. These grants are *more* cost-effective than we initially thought. We estimated they’d save ~17k lives. Looking back, we think they saved ~27k. Why? Costs dropped from ~$40 per child to ~$20 as the program grew from ~70k to ~1.5m kids - likely due to economies of scale, naira devaluation, and other cost savings. 2️⃣ In 2021, we made a $7.5m grant to Helen Keller International for vitamin A supplements in Nigeria. This grant looks *less* cost-effective than we expected. We thought it would save ~2k lives. Now we think it saved ~450. Why? We now think vitamin A deficiency in Nigeria is lower than we previously thought - and that a lot more kids receive VAS outside of campaigns than we realized. ➡️ Some other lessons: - Initial estimates can be way off - we need more humility about cost-effectiveness numbers - We should talk to local stakeholders more - we've probably missed useful info by not talking enough to govt officials and local experts - Location-specific data (like state-level burden estimates) can be really noisy - we need to triangulate with multiple sources - Quick program exits can strain relationships - saw this with VAS expansions in Nigeria ➡️ We picked these 2 grants for initial lookbacks because: - enough time had passed to see real outcomes - the findings could inform upcoming grant decisions - the grants were large/important to our portfolio Going forward, we plan to conduct lookbacks more regularly across our grant portfolio and publish what we find. 📄 More here: https://lnkd.in/gGhF3y6v

Your evaluation was rigorous. Your report killed it. You designed the methodology carefully. You interrogated the findings until you were confident they were right. Then you wrote a 80-page document. It buried the most important finding on page 34, and.. submitted it to a stakeholder who read the executive summary on a flight and never opened it again. The evaluation was good. The report undid it. And this isn't a personal failing. It's a sector-wide one. The development sector produces thousands of evaluation reports every year. Most of them change nothing. The writing is why. Not the data. Not the methodology. Not the sampling strategy or the theory of change. The writing. 𝗖𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗿. 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗲. 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴. 𝗣𝗶𝗰𝗸 𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝘁𝘄𝗼, 𝗺𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗲𝘃𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝘀 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝘇𝗲𝗿𝗼. They're dense where they should be direct. Cautious where they should be bold. Written to demonstrate expertise rather than to communicate it. And the people who needed to act on the findings... the minister skimming between meetings, the programme manager already stretched thin, the donor trying to decide whether to renew, they encountered a wall of jargon, a forest of tables, and a recommendation section so hedged and generalised it could apply to any programme anywhere. So they didn't act. Or they acted on instinct instead of evidence. Because the report didn't give them a choice. Here's how to do better... 1. Write for a real audience, not an abstract one ↳ Not “stakeholders” ↳ The specific person who will use this ↳ The minister with 5 minutes ↳ The programme manager under pressure ↳ The donor deciding on funding If you don’t know who you’re writing for, you’ll default to writing for yourself. 2. Start with the decision, not the methodology ↳ What needs to change because of this report? Write to that. 3. Lead with the answer ↳ Don’t make people work for the insight Page 1 should tell them what matters 4. Design for use, not submission ↳ A report is not the final product A decision is ---- Want insights like this directly in your inbox? Sign up for my mailing list. It's FREE! 👉 https://lnkd.in/ec8mqV2M

How Do You Turn ESG Goals into Tangible Results? Have you ever wondered how to translate your company’s ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) ambitions into actionable, measurable outcomes? It’s a journey that many organizations are embarking on, and it starts with understanding the numbers behind your performance. The key lies in identifying the right metrics. Imagine you’ve conducted a materiality assessment and pinpointed energy management as a core focus. You might track total energy use, energy reduction, and the percentage of renewable energy utilized. These metrics tell a story about your environmental impact and progress. Or perhaps your priority is human capital management. In this case, metrics like training hours, employee satisfaction scores, and career development opportunities reveal how well your organization supports its workforce. These numbers aren't just data points; they reflect your commitment to improving employee well-being. But how do you get these numbers? It’s all about setting up the right infrastructure. Start by identifying where your data will come from. Operations might handle energy data, while HR provides workforce insights. Clearly communicate what data is needed and in what format, and consider automating data collection to save time and improve accuracy. Data accuracy is crucial. Investors and stakeholders rely on credible ESG reports, so each data point must be verified and validated. Establishing strong protocols for data collection and reporting ensures that your metrics are reliable and your organization’s reputation remains intact. Remember, Every company that excels in ESG reporting started at the beginning. By investing time in building solid processes today, you’re setting the foundation for reliable, actionable insights tomorrow. What metrics are you focusing on to track your ESG performance? Let’s share ideas and learn from each other’s experiences! 💬

📚 Behind the Scenes of Scientific Book Editing: My Journey with Springer Nature & Elsevier Editing a book for a major science publisher is a marathon, not a sprint - and I have had the privilege of running it three times. Once you establish yourself as an expert in a particular field, you may receive an invitation from an acquisition editor to submit a book proposal. This is where the journey begins: crafting a compelling structure, articulating the book’s significance, identifying its potential readership, and pinpointing the knowledge gap it aims to fill. 📝 The proposal undergoes rigorous review - typically by three subject matter experts and the publisher’s editorial team. If approved (which can take months), the real work begins: assembling a team of leading researchers to contribute chapters. As editor, you may also author key sections, especially the introduction. 📅 Over the next 1 - 2 years, you will review each chapter, suggest revisions, and ensure the content meets the highest standards. Once finalized, the manuscript goes to the publishing team for formatting and layout. Then comes the proofing stage - an intense collaboration between authors and editors to polish every detail. 🎉 Finally, the book is published both online and in print. Receiving those complimentary hardcopies is a moment of pride - holding the result of global collaboration between authors, editors, and publishers. Book editing is more than a technical task – it is a leadership role, a creative endeavor, and a testament to scholarly teamwork. Grateful for the opportunity to contribute to the scientific community in this way. #bookediting #academicpublishing #springernature #elsevier #sciencecommunication #publishingjourney

Strong evaluation reports are essential for learning, accountability, and better development outcomes. According to guidance from the (former) United States Agency for International Development (USAID), an effective evaluation report should be clear, evidence-based, and designed to inform decision-making. A well-prepared report does more than document findings—it helps organizations understand what works, what does not, and why. Key elements of a strong evaluation report include: • A concise executive summary that highlights purpose, methods, findings, and conclusions • Clear evaluation questions linked to program decisions • Transparent methods and acknowledgement of limitations • Evidence-based findings supported by qualitative and quantitative data • Practical, action-oriented recommendations Equally important is ensuring transparency and learning by sharing evaluation findings widely and integrating them into future program design and strategy. In the field of international development and evaluation, the real value of an evaluation lies not only in the analysis, but in how its insights are used to improve programs and policies. What practices have you found most useful when preparing or reviewing evaluation reports? #Evaluation #MonitoringAndEvaluation #InternationalDevelopment #Learning #USAID #EvalCommunity

How do you measure a system changing? It's not easy, but it is possible. As evaluators, strategists and funders increasingly focus on systems change, there’s growing urgency to move beyond traditional evaluation methods. A recent report from The Freedom Fund offers clear, practical insights - grounded in anti-slavery work - that are deeply relevant for any systems change effort. Here are three takeaways that stood out for me 👇 1️⃣ The challenge (Why systems change is hard to measure) - Systems are dynamic and constantly shifting, making it difficult to map clear cause and effect. - Power, a core lever of change, is relational and hard to quantify. - Traditional methods often overlook key perspectives, especially of those most affected. This complexity demands new tools and new mindsets. 2️⃣ The opportunity (What successful measurement looks like) - Start with systems thinking: co-design your theory of change with the system in mind. - Use a mixed-methods approach, especially qualitative tools to surface nuanced change. - Prioritise diverse, intersectional voices, especially those traditionally excluded. - Embrace learning from unintended outcomes as well as intended ones. Systems change takes time. Measurement must too. 3️⃣ The toolkit (How to measure what matters) The report highlights a range of approaches—some of my favourites include: - Outcome Harvesting – work backwards from real-world change. - Most Significant Change – uncover what matters most to those affected. - Process Tracing – test causal pathways. - Social Network Analysis – visualise relationships and influence. - SenseMaker® – blend story and data to make sense of messy change. If you're navigating systems change, whether in modern slavery, health equity, climate, or beyond, this report is worth a read.

“Show outcomes, not outputs!” I’ve given (and received) this feedback more times than I can count while helping organizations tell their impact stories. And listen, it’s technically right…but it can also feel completely unfair. We love to say things like: ✅ 100 teachers trained ✅ 10,000 learners reached ✅ 500 handwashing stations installed But funders (and most payers) want to know: 𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵? That’s the outcomes vs outputs gap: ➡️ Output: 100 teachers trained ➡️ Outcome: Teachers who received training scored 15% higher on evaluations than those who didn’t The second tells a story of change. But measuring outcomes can be 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝘃𝗲. It’s easy to count the number of people who showed up. It’s costly to prove their lives got better because of it. And that creates a brutal inequality. Well-funded organizations with substantial M&E budgets continue to win. Meanwhile, incredible community-led organizations get sidelined for not having “evidence”- even when the change is happening right in front of us. So what can organizations with limited resources do? 𝗟𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗲𝘅𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵: That study from Daystar University showing teacher training improved learning by 10% in India? Use it. If your intervention is similar, cite their methodology and results as supporting evidence. 𝗗𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻 𝘀𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝗿 𝘀𝘁𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗲𝘀: Baseline and end-line surveys aren't perfect, but they're better than nothing. Self-reported confidence levels have limitations, but "85% of teachers reported feeling significantly more confident in their teaching abilities," tells a story. 𝗣𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗻𝗲𝗿 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀: Universities need research projects. Find one studying similar interventions and collaborate. Share costs, share data, share credit. 𝗨𝘀𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘅𝘆 𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀: Can't afford a 5-year longitudinal study? Track intermediate outcomes that research shows correlate with long-term impact. 𝗧𝗿𝘆 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗽𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗲𝘃𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: Let beneficiaries help design and conduct evaluations. It's cost-effective and often reveals insights that traditional methods miss. For example, train teachers to interview each other about your training program. And funders? Y’all have homework too. Some are already offering evaluation support (bless you). But let’s make it the rule, not the exception. What if 10-15% of every grant was earmarked for outcome measurement? What if we moved beyond gold-standard-only thinking? 𝗟𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝗼𝗳 𝗮 𝗰𝗲𝗿𝘁𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝗼𝗳 𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝗻 “𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗳𝘂𝗹”. We need outcomes. But we also need equity. How are you navigating this tension? What creative ways have you used to show impact without burning out your team or budget? #internationaldevelopment #FundingAfrica #fundraising #NonprofitLeadership #nonprofitafrica

Evaluation is a powerful tool that transforms data into actionable insights, guiding humanitarian programs to enhance their impact in complex environments. This UNFPA Evaluation Handbook provides a comprehensive, step-by-step guide tailored to country-level operations, specifically for Country Programme Evaluations (CPEs). It aims to strengthen evaluation practices by fostering methodological rigor, stakeholder engagement, and strategic utilization of findings, ensuring that evaluations serve as catalysts for positive change. Humanitarian professionals will find this handbook invaluable for its pragmatic approach, blending theory and practice in evaluation. It navigates through each evaluation phase: preparation, design, fieldwork, reporting, and dissemination, outlining tools, templates, and practical advice to support high-quality evaluations. It emphasizes principles such as accountability, adaptation, and a focus on sustainability, aligning evaluations with the UNFPA strategic priorities and the broader Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). For those committed to driving evidence-based actions, this handbook is a resource that bridges evaluation theory with actionable strategies, empowering professionals to conduct meaningful evaluations that foster learning, accountability, and informed decision-making in humanitarian settings.

As an M&E Specialist, I inherited a monitoring system drowning in 28 indicators. Staff couldn't keep up. Data quality was poor. Leadership couldn't use it for decision-making. I made a hard call: cut to 6 outcome-focused indicators. What happened next: Data accuracy and completeness improved significantly Staff reporting burden reduced by over 70% Leadership gained actionable insights they actually used The lesson: effective M&E isn't about tracking everything ,it's about tracking what matters. In complex programs, less can genuinely be more. #MonitoringEvaluation #MEL #ImpactMeasurement #InternationalDevelopment