Compare
Internal vs external evaluator
The pros and cons of using staff to evaluate your program versus hiring an outside evaluator, with questions to help you decide what fits your grant and budget.
In short
An internal evaluator is a staff member who knows the program well and costs less, but may have less time, training and distance. An external evaluator brings experience, objectivity and credibility with funders, at a higher cost. Many organizations use a mix, with an outside evaluator designing the plan and staff collecting data.
Side by side
| Internal evaluator | External evaluator | |
|---|---|---|
| Knows the program | Very well | Learns it quickly, sees it fresh |
| Cost | Lower, part of staff time | Higher, a contract |
| Objectivity | Harder to keep distance | Independent view |
| Credibility with funders | Varies | Usually stronger |
| Evaluation skills | Depends on the person | A specialty |
| Time | Competes with other duties | Dedicated |
When internal works well
Internal evaluation fits when the program is small, the funder does not require independence, and you have a staff member with real evaluation training and protected time to do it.
When to bring in an outside evaluator
Consider an external evaluator when the funder requires or rewards independence, when the program is large or complex, when you need statistical analysis or survey work, or when staff are already stretched.
A mix that often works
Many of our clients use a blend: we design the evaluation plan and tools, staff collect data during the year, and we analyze, report and present. It keeps costs down without giving up quality or independence.
Frequently asked questions
Does our funder require an external evaluator?
Can we start internal and switch later?
How much of a grant should go to evaluation?
Sources
- Program evaluation framework, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (opens in a new tab)