AmeriCorps State and National Evaluation Requirements

Sarah Yue, Program Impact Manager | 10/29/2019
2

Overview

• Definition and Types of Evaluation

• AmeriCorps State and National Evaluation 

Requirements

• Alternative Evaluation Approach (AEA) Requests

• Evaluation Policy Guidance and Updates

• Resources to Support Evaluation Efforts

• Sharing Evaluation Guidance and Resources with 

Subgrantees/Sites
Definition of Evaluation for AmeriCorps 

Programs (45 CFR § 2522.700)

• “Uses scientifically-based research methods

to assess the effectiveness of programs.” 

• “Unlike performance measures, evaluations 

estimate the impacts of programs by comparing 

the outcomes for individuals receiving a 

service or participating in a program to the 

outcomes for similar individuals not receiving 

a service or not participating in a program.”

• “Intended to establish a causal relationship 

between your program and a desired (or 

undesired) program outcome.”

3
Evaluation Types: Methodology

• Impact Evaluation

– Capable of assessing causal relationship between program 

activities and outcomes

– Requires control group or statistically matched comparison 

group

– Includes randomized controlled trials (RCT) and/or quasi- experimental designs (QED)

• Outcome Evaluation

– Non-experimental assessment of program outcomes

– Includes pre-post assessment with no comparison group, or 

comparison groups that are not statistically matched

• Process Evaluation

– Assesses how a program is implemented

4
Evaluation Types: Source

• Independent evaluation

– Uses an external evaluator with no formal or personal 

relationship with, or stake in, the administration, 

management, or finances of the grantee or of the 

program being evaluated

• Internal evaluation

– Performed in-house by the grantee (i.e., by staff from 

the grantee’s own organization or other stakeholders, 

such as board members, partners, or volunteer 

affiliates) without the use of an independent external 

evaluator

5
AmeriCorps State and National 

Evaluation Requirements

• Specified in AmeriCorps Regulations: 45 CFR 

§§2522.500 -.540 and .700-.740.

• Purpose: “to strengthen your AmeriCorps 

program and foster continuous improvement, and 

help identify best practices and models that merit 

replication, as well as programmatic weaknesses 

that need attention” (§ 2522.500)

• Requirements differ based on:

– Type of funding (competitive vs. formula)

– Type of grant

– Size of grant

– Program history

6
Requirements by Type of Funding

• Direct grantee (national direct, Indian Tribe, or 

state/territory without a commission)

– Evaluation conducted during the grant cycle and 

submitted with the next recompete application

• State competitive subgrantee

– Evaluation conducted during the grant cycle and 

submitted with the next recompete application

• State formula subgrantee

– Evaluation requirements established by the state 

commission

7
Requirements by Type of 

Competitive Grant

• Cost Reimbursement

– Internal evaluation or independent (external) impact 

evaluation, depending on grant size

• Full-Cost Fixed (cost/MSY > $800)

– Internal evaluation or independent (external) impact 

evaluation, depending on grant size

• EAP or No Cost Slots (cost/MSY < $800)

– Internal evaluation

8
Requirements by Size of 

Competitive Grant (non-EAP)

• Large grantee ($500,000 or more per year)

– Independent (external) impact evaluation

• Small grantee (less than $500,000/year)

– Internal or independent evaluation

*How size is calculated:

– Average yearly CNCS funding received during the grant 

cycle in which the evaluation is conducted

– Will be affected by changes in continuation funding, if 

any

9
Requirements by Competitive

Program History

• First three-year competitive grant cycle

– No evaluation required

– Should build strong data collection systems and begin 

the evaluation planning process

• Second three-year competitive grant cycle for 

same project*

– Evaluation plan required with competitive grant 

application

• Must be approved by CNCS within 1 year of grant award

– Evaluation must be completed during this grant cycle

*”Same project” is defined in 45 C.F.R.§ 2522.340

10
Requirements by Competitive

Program History

• Subsequent competitive grant cycles for same 

project

– Evaluation report required with competitive grant 

application

• From most recent grant cycle

• Report will be assessed as part of grant application review 

process

– Evaluation plan required with competitive grant 

application

• Should build on/complement previous evaluation efforts

• Must be approved by CNCS within 1 year of grant award

– Evaluation must be completed during each grant cycle

11
Requirements Common to

All Competitive Evaluations

• Must evaluate significant (not necessarily primary) 

service activities

• Must cover at least one year of CNCS-funded activity for the same project

– “one year” = activities that take place during one program 

year (not necessarily 12 months)

• Must include site(s) supported under the grant

– Evaluations of site(s) supported under a different legal grant 

will not meet the evaluation requirement, even if it is the same program model

• Must align with the approved evaluation plan

• Must produce a report that adequately describes the 

evaluation conducted

– Report should include introduction, description of 

design/methods, and section on findings and results

12
Determining Evaluation 

Requirements for Grant Applicants

• Things to consider:

– Type of grant (cost reimbursement/fixed amount/EAP)

– Size of grant (amount of CNCS funding)

– Program history

• Must be considered for:

– Most recent competitive grant cycle for the same project 

(if applicable)

– Competitive grant application

13
Example 1: A state subgrantee is in their 3rd year of competitive 

funding after having been funded in formula for 6 years. In 

their current competitive grant cycle, the subgrantee is 

receiving $325,000 in CNCS funding per year through a costreimbursement grant. The subgrantee is requesting the same 

amount per year in their recompete application but is switching 

to a full-cost fixed amount grant.

14

Determining Evaluation 

Requirements for Grant Applicants

Most recent competitive 

grant cycle

Competitive grant application

Type of grant Cost-reimbursement Full-cost fixed amount

Size of grant $325,000 $325,000

Program history 3 years of competitive funding for the same 

project
Evaluation requirement: 

Must submit an evaluation plan (any type of 

evaluation)*

*The state commission may establish additional 

evaluation requirements for the subgrantee that go 

beyond the CNCS requirements.

15

Determining Evaluation 

Requirements for Grant Applicants
Example 2: A National Direct grantee has operated the 

EnviroCorps program for the past 15 years. This year they have 

acquired a new partner and are proposing to expand their 

project to 2 new states and increase the size of their costreimbursement CNCS grant from $400,000 to $600,000 per 

year. Their recompete application also describes adjustments 

to member training and supervision, plus a shift in the way 

environmental improvements will be assessed by the program.

16

Determining Evaluation 

Requirements for Grant Applicants

Most recent 

competitive grant cycle

Grant application

Type of funding Competitive Competitive

Type of grant Cost-reimbursement Cost-reimbursement

Size of grant $400,000 $600,000

Program history 15 years of competitive funding for 

the same project
Evaluation requirement: 

• Must submit an evaluation report (any type of 

evaluation)

• Must submit an evaluation plan for an 

independent impact evaluation

Determining Evaluation 

Requirements for Grant Applicants
Alternative Evaluation Approaches 

(AEAs)

• For cases where the evaluation requirements in the 

CFR do not fit a program’s structure, developmental 

stage, and/or information needs

• Bases for approval of an AEA:

• Applicable for a single three-year grant cycle

• Guidance on how to request an AEA: 

https://www.nationalservice.gov/sites/default/files/doc

uments/Alternative-Evaluation-Approach-FINAL.pdf

18

Large Grantees Only All Grantees

Program structure Timing

Previous impact evaluation

Replication
ASN Evaluation Policy Guidance

• CNCS Evaluation Policies webpage: 

https://www.nationalservice.gov/resources/evalua

tion/cncs-evaluation-policies

– AmeriCorps State and National Evaluation FAQs: 

provide additional context and details on how the ASN 

evaluation requirements are implemented

– Alternative Evaluation Approach (AEA) Guidance: 

outlines the process for requesting an AEA and the 

bases for CNCS approval of AEA requests

19
Most Significant Updates to 

ASN Evaluation Policy Guidance

• Redefines “average annual program grant” to be 

based on the grant cycle during which the 

evaluation is implemented

– Existing grantees who are redefined from “small” to 

“large” will receive automatic AEAs for their CURRENT 

grant cycle (i.e., for the evaluation they are conducting 

now)

• Eliminates requirement to submit an AEA request 

to conduct a member-focused evaluation

– Evaluations focused on member outcomes are 

allowable if this is a significant component of the 

grantee’s theory of change and logic model

20
Most Significant Updates to 

ASN Evaluation Policy Guidance

• Eliminates automatic exemption from the impact 

evaluation requirement for grantees who 

previously completed impact evaluations

– Grantees must request an AEA if they wish to conduct a 

non-impact evaluation

– AEA approval will be contingent on assessed evidence 

tier and quality for recompete application

– Existing grantees who have already received 

exemptions will receive automatic AEAs for their 

CURRENT grant cycle (i.e., for the evaluation they are 

conducting now)

21
Resources to Support 

Evaluation Efforts

• Evaluation Resources & Training Page: 

https://www.nationalservice.gov/resources/evaluation

– Evaluation Core Curriculum

– Other evaluation-related resources

22
Resources to Support 

Evaluation Efforts

• Individualized Evaluation Technical Assistance

– Available free of charge to all competitively funded ASN 

grantees and subgrantees

– Can include:

• Answering questions on evaluation design and approach

• Providing feedback on evaluation materials and data 

collection tools

• Advising on data collection and/or analysis procedures

• Discussing approaches for identifying an external evaluator

• Requesting assistance with evaluation plan development or 

revision

– Requested via TA Portal: 

https://americorpsevaluationta.norc.org 23
Sharing Evaluation Guidance and 

Resources with Subgrantees

CNCS expects commissions and prime grantees to:

• Disseminate CNCS evaluation policy guidance to 

subgrantees

• Train subgrantees on evaluation requirements and 

best practices

• Provide support to subgrantees on evaluation 

planning/implementation

– State subgrantees may only submit requests through the TA 

Portal after consulting with their State Commission

• Factor evaluation requirements into state-specific 

review processes

• Help subgrantees use evaluation results for program 

improvement 24
Questions?

25