Good fit
- NGOs, foundations and CSR teams evaluating a programme or portfolio
- Policy and implementation teams designing baseline, endline or retrospective studies
- Organisations that need independent analysis and reporting with limitations stated
For NGOs, CSR teams, foundations and policy programmes
Impact Evaluation and Analytics
Turn programme activity and field data into a defensible evaluation design, transparent analysis and decision-ready evidence.
Discuss an evaluation →
The buyer problem
What needs to change
Programme teams are often asked to prove impact after delivery has begun, with inconsistent indicators, incomplete baselines or data collected for operations rather than evaluation.
Cost of inaction
Without a defensible design and transparent limitations, reports may overclaim, miss decision-relevant findings, fail funder scrutiny or leave future data collection no stronger than before.
Fit before scope
Who this is for — and who it is not for
Not a fit
- Teams seeking a predetermined positive conclusion
- Organisations unwilling to provide data provenance or disclose material limitations
- Requests to manipulate indicators, samples or findings for reporting convenience
Process outcomes
What the engagement is designed to leave behind
These are defined working outputs and capability improvements — not guarantees of an external decision or result.
An evaluation question and design matched to the available evidence
Indicators and analytical choices that can be explained to decision-makers
Integrated quantitative and qualitative findings where the data supports them
A report that distinguishes evidence, inference, limitation and recommendation
Exact deliverables
What lands on your desk
- Theory of change or impact-pathway review
- Evaluation framework, questions and indicator matrix
- Sampling, instrument and analysis plan
- Quantitative analysis, qualitative synthesis and triangulation
- Technical report, decision brief and agreed tables or dashboard outputs
Client inputs
What we need from you
- Programme documents, objectives, geography and implementation timeline
- Available monitoring, baseline, endline or administrative data
- Stakeholder access and ethics/consent status where primary data is proposed
- The decisions, reporting requirements and audiences the evaluation must serve
Method
A documented route from problem to evidence
Frame
Clarify the decision, evaluation questions, causal logic and feasible level of inference.
Design
Set indicators, comparison logic, sampling, instruments and analysis before execution.
Analyse
Process and triangulate evidence with reproducible choices and explicit limitations.
Translate
Deliver technical findings and a decision-facing narrative without overstating causality.
Indicative investment
The range is a guide; the written scope fixes the fee
Evaluation engagements are typically ₹75,000–₹4,00,000. Multi-site or regulatory-grade CSR impact assessments commonly fall within ₹2,00,000–₹5,00,000.
Every engagement is scoped in writing against objectives, inputs, methods, deliverables, review points and exclusions before work begins.
What changes the price
- Number of programmes, sites, respondent groups and languages
- Whether primary data collection is required
- Data cleaning, linkage and reconstruction effort
- Analytical complexity, reporting formats and stakeholder review rounds
Ethical boundaries
What Gurjas will not deliver
- No predetermined findings or suppression of material limitations
- No primary data collection without required ethics and consent arrangements
- No causal claim beyond what the design and evidence can support
- No transfer of identifiable participant data through insecure channels
Relevant proof
Credentials and methods you can verify
FAQ
Questions to settle before a fit call
What if we have no baseline?
We first assess whether a credible retrospective or contribution-focused design is possible. The report will state clearly what can and cannot be inferred.
Do you collect field data?
Primary data collection can be scoped where geography, ethics, consent, language and field-management requirements are clear. It is not assumed in the entry diagnostic.
Can you work with data we already hold?
Yes. We review provenance, structure and limitations before agreeing the analytical claims the data can support.
A clear first step
Start with the problem, evidence available and decision deadline.
Use the structured intake form. We usually respond within two working days with fit, missing inputs and the next sensible scope.