Our research and evaluation approaches are grounded in international standards, adapted to local realities, and continuously improved through field learning.
Every methodology we deploy is selected for its fitness to the specific question at hand — not because it is familiar or convenient.
We integrate quantitative and qualitative methods to generate findings that are both statistically grounded and contextually rich. Survey data tells us what is happening; qualitative inquiry tells us why — and in development contexts, the "why" is usually where the actionable insight lies. Our mixed-methods studies do not treat qualitative and quantitative components as sequential modules; they are designed together so that each strand informs the other from the outset. Interview findings guide questionnaire refinement; survey patterns drive the selection of purposive qualitative samples.
Our programme design and MEL work is anchored in RBM principles — defining clear results chains, setting SMART indicators, and establishing accountability mechanisms at every level. We work with programme teams to build indicator banks that are genuinely measurable in the field, not aspirational proxies that look good on paper and prove uncollectable in practice. This involves explicit decisions about data sources, collection frequency, responsible parties, and disaggregation protocols — all documented in a monitoring plan that field teams can actually follow.
All our evaluations are structured around the six OECD-DAC criteria: Relevance, Coherence, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Impact, and Sustainability — applied systematically and proportionately.
Evaluations conducted for UN system clients adhere fully to UNEG Norms for Evaluation in the UN System and UNEG Standards for Evaluation — ensuring independence, utility, and credibility.
MSC methodology captures developmental outcomes that conventional indicator frameworks cannot adequately measure — particularly transformative change in behaviours, relationships, and power dynamics.
Genuine participation by communities and right-holders is not just ethically important — it produces better data, more grounded analysis, and more sustainable recommendations. Our field teams include experienced facilitators fluent in Urdu, Sindhi, Pashto, Seraiki, and Dhatki, enabling authentic engagement with communities where language access is the first barrier to meaningful participation. We design participatory processes that are structured enough to produce comparable data across sites while remaining flexible enough to surface locally specific findings that a standardised questionnaire would miss.
Our methodological choices are shaped by direct fieldwork experience in environments where standard approaches frequently fail: post-flood communities in interior Sindh without internet connectivity; highland villages in Gilgit-Baltistan and AJK where enumerators travel by jeep and on foot; and peri-urban slums in Karachi and Lahore where respondent mobility and household instability make panel surveys challenging.
This fieldwork background means we can advise clients on survey design decisions that go beyond the textbook — which CAPI platforms hold up in offline mode without data loss, how to manage enumerator performance when field supervisors cannot be physically present, and how to design sampling approaches that account for seasonal population movement in pastoral and agricultural communities.
We have delivered primary data collection across all four provinces of Pakistan and Azad Jammu & Kashmir, including in districts classified as high-security or difficult-access environments. Our field coordination protocols include community entry procedures, local liaison arrangements, and risk assessment checklists that are adapted to specific geographic and sociopolitical contexts rather than applied as a generic template.
Where secondary data review is the appropriate methodology, we combine official Pakistan Bureau of Statistics data with BISP, NADRA, and sector-specific administrative datasets, and cross-validate against donor programme monitoring data where available — producing evidence syntheses that are genuinely grounded in Pakistan's data environment rather than reliant on global proxies.
We are happy to walk potential clients through our methodological approach for any specific assignment type before a procurement decision is made.
Start a Conversation