The organisations' perceptions of the most useful parts of the Trust's work focus on both what was seen as beneficial and how the work was carried out, in particular the engagement of all parts of the organisation in the work. The key perceptions focused on:

• The objective useful evidence coming out of the work and highlighting gaps in the service/communication/delivery [93%]
• Providing an objective view and promoting dialogue between stakeholder groups. [64%]
• Raising the Organisation's awareness about the importance of m/e. [22%]
• Access to very practical help, which could be put into practice. [19%]
• The development of clarity and focus. [19%]
• The Evaluation Trust working directly with the management committee/trustees. [16%]
• The clarification of roles. [13%]
• Presenting the evidence at wider meetings such as AGM etc. [13%]

Those organisations that identified ' least useful parts of the work identified the following concerns:

• The Evaluation Trust's involvement with them had generated a lot of extra work, which they did not have time for. [13%]
• Unhappy experiences with the first consultant allocated to the work and thus delayed progress. [9%]
• Communication and contact with the Evaluation Trust was sometimes difficult [9%]
• The needs of the organisation were not fully met ( 9%)

58% of the organisations said they had already made use of the evaluation work. The usage shows a commitment both to making changes in the organisation and using the report proactively with funders. The changes include:

• The data gathered has been useful to make changes/ improvements/plan for the future. [56%] . the changes include a new focus on users, organisational change; and developing different and more effective systems for m/e and greater understanding of its value
• In developing a strategic plan, making bids to funders and/or reporting to funders. [55%]
• The Evaluation Trust's report was circulated widely which helped to inform management and broaden involvement. [16%]
• In improving the image of the organisation/ developing better public relations. (9%)

The interviews explored what difference, if any, did undertaking the evaluation work make to the organisations- for example, were there changes in the way the organisation did things or delivers the service as a result of the work with the Evaluation Trust?. For some organisations the question had come too early in the work.

The following examples of outcomes of the work were provided by organisations:

• The organisation has identified that evaluation is necessary and has helped organisations to agree what techniques need to be used. [35%]
• The organisation is in the process of implementing policies generated through the Evaluation Trust work. ( 35%)
• It has helped with development planning in the organisation. [29%]
• The organisation is more led by what the community/ users wants- the community/ users are involved in needs assessment and planning. [13%]
• The organisation has successfully bid for funds. [13%]
• It has changed attitudes of trustees. [10%]
• It has helped learning to take place ( 10%)

8 organisations felt there were surprises.

• Unexpected learning and recommendations
• An unexpected affirmation of the service.
• Unexpected achievements and confidence boost

Whilst many organisations did not feel that things would have been different for their organisation without the help of the Evaluation Trust, or were not sure, 11 organisations ( 35%) said things would have been different for their organisation without the help of the Evaluation Trust. They cited the following examples:

• Without the tools for m/e the organisation could not satisfy funder's requirements. [9 organisations]
• We are clearer now. [6 organisations]
• External input helped to reach consensus about m/e. [4 organisations]
• We would not have had objective information for planning the future. [4 organisations]
• In-house evaluation would not have been respected as much. [4 organisations]
• We would have no monitoring /evaluation systems. [3 organisations]
• Morale would have been low. [3 organisations]
• The organisation would not have survived [3 organisations]
• The organisation would be lacking a strong trustee group

In general the organisations, who received training from the Evaluation Trust, reported that they had very positive feed back from the participants. The knowledge gained is being used to put m/e systems in place and awareness-raising sessions with management have been extremely useful in taking the work forward.