1. Center for the Pacific Asian Family Organizational Evaluation Project

2. Project Background ▫CPAF had an overarching theory of change that needed a working logic model for each program ▫Data collection tools had been created organically as programs changed and developed ▫Program database was constructed to measure outputs instead of outcomes

3. What we asked ourselves How do we measure our impact? ▫Survivor-centered, trauma-informed definitions of “success” How do the services we provide help survivors reach their goals? ▫Development of working logic models How do our tools help us measure? ▫Review and revision of data collection tools ▫Exploration of database options

4. Tools to share Goals “menu” for case plans Survivor self-assessment and exit survey “Storycorps” template

5. What we’ve been thinking about Creating a “culture of curiosity:” involving staff at all levels with discussions about outcomes and sharing data across the organization Developing culturally and linguistically sensitive approaches to data collection and evaluation Expanding the definitions of “data”: finding creative ways to gather survivor input Community-building: engaging with survivors beyond their participation in our programs Alignment with the field: dialogue with funders and other DV providers about outcome measurements