Field brings together what your team knows, what your files and data show, and what the organization can confidently say, decide, and learn.
Start with the information already there or with what the program needs to track next.
Each engagement produces something useful on its own. Together, they can help your team build on what it learns instead of starting over with each report or planning cycle.
The aim is not more data. It is information your team can use.
Answer five choice-based questions to see the likely fit, what needs clarification, which materials would be useful, what you would receive, and what Field would do.
01
When a board meeting, public claim, or program decision needs a clear answer and the useful information is spread across years of files, reports, notes, and data.
A clear view of what the current materials support, where the limits are, and what the organization can confidently say now.
Every claim the organization already makes, set against what is actually behind it.
| The claim | Support | What it rests on |
|---|---|---|
| 85% of enrolled participants complete the program | strong | Attendance logs and program files, 2022–2024 |
| Employer partners value the placements | partial | Three partner interviews; no wider follow-up |
| Participants leave with more confidence | thin | Described in staff notes; never measured directly |
| The program leads to lasting employment | absent | No contact with participants after they exit |
02
When a program is being designed, expanded, or reconsidered and the assumptions connecting the work to change need closer attention.
A theory of change that connects program assumptions to relevant research and separates what is known elsewhere from what your team still needs to learn locally.
The same support scale, applied to the links between steps rather than to finished claims.
Structured placements of this length repeatedly show skill gains across a wide research base.
Research is mixed on whether skill gains convert to offers. The difference tracks the local labour market, not the training.
Few studies follow households this far, and none are from a comparable setting.
03
When teams collect a great deal but still cannot answer the questions that drive program and strategy decisions—or when a growing program needs a practical way to learn.
A focused measurement system tied to real decisions, workable routines, clear responsibilities, and reasonable burden.
Each measure the team already collects, placed by the staff time it takes and how far it moves a real decision. Both are the team’s own judgment, agreed in a working session — not a calculated score.
The same measures as a table
| Measure | Staff time | Informs a decision | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly attendance | 20 | 70 | Collected today |
| Employer feedback survey | 33 | 80 | Collected today |
| Exit interview | 54 | 68 | Collected today |
| Staff case notes | 66 | 58 | Collected today |
| Satisfaction star rating | 18 | 22 | Collected today |
| Intake demographics form | 42 | 34 | Collected today |
| Weekly activity log | 72 | 11 | Candidate to stop |
| Quarterly funder narrative | 90 | 20 | Candidate to stop |
| Six-month follow-up | 62 | 94 | Not collected today |
Five choice-based questions will give you a tailored starting point. Nothing to upload, and no need to name your organization.
See your Field resultA nonprofit can work with Field directly. A foundation can fund one defined engagement that the grantee chooses and directs.
A nonprofit works directly with Field around its own materials, decisions, and measurement needs.
A foundation funds a defined engagement for one grantee. The grantee chooses whether to participate, sets the question, selects the materials, and decides what is shared.
Field Discovery will suggest a likely starting point and show the practical detail for that path. Nothing to upload.
Try Field Discovery