Relational Impact Institute

    Measurement & Evaluation

    How We Measure Impact

    Relational health is easy to describe and hard to prove. At the Relational Impact Institute, every program — from cohort-based leadership training to digital education platforms — is evaluated using the same measurement backbone, so that impact can be compared honestly across the portfolio rather than reported inconsistently program by program.

    Last reviewed:

    Our Approach

    Each RII program administers a shared pre- and post-program assessment, adapted with program-specific questions but built on a common core. This lets us track three consistent categories of change across every program we run:

    Capability Change

    Whether participants report increased confidence and skill in handling difficult relational moments — communication, conflict de-escalation, self-awareness of how their reactions affect others.

    Support & Access Change

    Whether participants report feeling more supported and more aware of where to turn for help — a measure of whether a program builds lasting connection, not just a one-time experience.

    Applied Behavior & Sustainability

    Whether participants report a concrete plan for using what they've learned after the program ends, and measurable improvement in their relationships as a result.

    Why This Matters

    • Comparability. Funders supporting more than one RII program can see outcomes measured the same way, rather than reconciling different metrics for each grant.
    • Accountability. We report what changed, not just who showed up. Reach and attendance are outputs; the categories above are outcomes.
    • Continuous improvement. Consistent measurement across programs lets us identify which delivery models — cohort-based, digital, train-the-trainer — produce the strongest applied outcomes, and refine accordingly.

    A Note on Rigor

    We publish our measurement categories here, not our instrument's exact item wording. This is intentional: publishing survey questions verbatim can bias how participants respond to them, undermining the reliability of the data we and our funders rely on. Full instrument documentation is available to funders and evaluation partners on request.