Methodology 11
Sampling, analysis plans, mixed methods, limitations and adaptive management.
Sampling, analysis plans, mixed methods, limitations and adaptive management.
Score the adaptive management plan that operationalizes how findings flow back to program decisions. Paste the section to assess whether learning will actually drive program change.
Score the analysis plan section of any document where one is required, including MEL plans, inception reports, evaluation reports, contribution analyses, and needs assessments. Use to confirm the plan maps to questions, names methods specifically, and includes triangulation and quality checks.
Score the documentation of instrument pilot testing (what was piloted, with whom, what was revised). Paste the pilot report to assess whether the final instrument is field-ready.
Score the methodology limitations disclosure in a report for honesty, completeness, and impact-on-findings explanation. Paste the limitations section to assess credibility.
Score the methodological rigor of an evaluation, study, or assessment across five dimensions using AI. Use to assess MEL plans, evaluation ToRs, inception reports, evaluation reports, contribution analyses, needs assessments, sampling plans, and any document where methodology choices need justification and quality safeguards.
Score how qualitative and quantitative data are integrated in a mixed-methods design. Paste the methodology or analysis section to assess whether integration is substantive (not parallel).
Score a qualitative coding frame (codebook) for structure, mutual exclusivity, and grounded-theory hygiene. Paste the codebook to assess whether it will yield consistent coding.
Score the sample size and selection rationale in a methodology or sampling plan. Paste the sampling section to assess whether the sample will support the intended analyses. Use this for sample-size justification and selection rationale (analytic purpose, power, method fit, feasibility); for the sampling frame itself (the list or source the sample is drawn from) see sampling-frame-quality.
Score the sampling frame itself (the list or source from which the sample is drawn) for completeness, currency, and coverage. Separate from sample-size justification. Use this for the frame itself (coverage, currency, cleaning, frame limitations); for the sample-size justification and selection rationale see sample-justification.
Score the quality of stakeholder engagement across five dimensions using AI. Use to assess MEL plans, evaluation ToRs, inception reports, evaluation reports, learning agendas, contribution analyses, and any deliverable involving stakeholder consultation.
Score the triangulation approach across methods, sources, and perspectives in an evaluation or analysis plan. Paste the relevant section to assess whether findings will be defensibly cross-corroborated. Use this for the triangulation approach itself (method, source, investigator, conflict resolution, reporting visibility); for per-finding evidentiary review in a report see findings-evidence-strength.