Check each statement that is true of your evaluation.
Suggested claim language
Most nonprofits, most of the time, can credibly claim contribution — and that is fine and fundable. Contribution analysis (see BetterEvaluation and John Mayne’s work) builds a credible case that your program plausibly contributed, given other influences. Reserve “we caused X” for designs with a real counterfactual.
Free up budget for honest evaluation
Good evaluation costs money that restricted grants rarely cover. Good Circles builds unrestricted income — about 10% of each merchant’s net profit, conservatively ~$72 per active supporter per year (an estimate), recurring and free for your nonprofit — exactly the flexible funding that lets you invest in measuring your impact properly.
Claim a Founding Nonprofit spot →Sources & tools
Free first
- BetterEvaluation — contribution analysis — free, authoritative guidance on building a contribution claim.
- W.K. Kellogg Foundation Evaluation Handbook — a free, classic guide to nonprofit program evaluation.
- What Works Clearinghouse — reviews evidence on what causes outcomes in education and beyond.
Paid — optional labor-savers
- An external evaluator — designs a credible evaluation and an independent claim of impact. Worth it when a major funder requires rigorous, independent outcome evidence.
Last verified 2026-06-17. Figures and rules change — verify at the source before you act.
FAQ
What is the difference between attribution and contribution?
Attribution claims that your program caused an outcome — that the result would not have happened without you. Contribution claims that your program was one of several factors that plausibly helped produce the outcome. Attribution needs a counterfactual; contribution needs a credible, evidence-based story.
When can a nonprofit claim attribution?
Generally only when the evaluation includes a counterfactual — a comparison or control group, ideally with randomized assignment — and other plausible causes can be reasonably ruled out. Most nonprofit programs do not have this, which is why contribution is the more honest claim for them.
What is contribution analysis?
Contribution analysis, developed by evaluator John Mayne, is a structured approach to building a credible case that a program contributed to an outcome. It tests the program’s theory of change against evidence and alternative explanations, rather than relying on a control group. BetterEvaluation has free guidance on it.
Is claiming contribution weaker than attribution?
No. For most nonprofit work, contribution is the honest and appropriate claim, and funders increasingly respect it. Overstating causation with weak evidence damages credibility; a well-argued contribution claim is both defensible and persuasive.