Rate a program against the five DAC-style dimensions — relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, sustainability — and get a per-program AI report.
Quick answer
Use it at review time to score a program against the five OECD-DAC criteria — relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, sustainability — with evidence attached per item, assembled into a one-page report funders, boards and the team itself can argue with.
Impact claims without a structure are adjectives. This assessment scores a program against five criteria in the OECD-DAC tradition — relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, sustainability — with evidence attached item by item, and the AI report assembles the rated dimensions into a one-page review that funders, boards and the team itself can argue with. Honest enough to hurt, structured enough to use.
Sample form and report preview — live and ready to fill in.
Everything you need to run this template.
Relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, sustainability — rated separately.
No bare scores: each rating names its proof.
Baseline versus now keeps the review about change, not mood.
One page assembling dimensions, evidence and the soft spots.
From copy to deliverable in four steps.
Copy it in; scope items to one program or a cohort.
Answer as the delivery team first, then invite partners.
The AI summary assembles the five dimensions onto one page.
Board, funder and team react to the same dated document.
Pick your role — see how it fits your workflow.
Defend impact claims with a structured, evidence-tagged file.
One page, five dimensions — strategy meetings stop being theatre.
Comparability across grantees without forcing one template on all.
What makes this template work as a professional deliverable.
A preview of the real questions in this form — exactly what respondents see.
