This is a snapshot in which the situation of the target group is compared with the situation of the control group at a particular moment in time.
90% of children suffering from diarrhoea in Region x received successful medical treatment. In the control group in Region Y, only 60% of the children suffering from diarrhoea received successful medical treatment.
|A plausible case can be made wether an intervention has contributed to the targeted effects or not.||There is no link to the initial situation. It is not known whether and how the situations of the target and control groups has changed since the start of the intervention.|
|If the target and control groups were identical at the start, it is possible to make assertions about the effect of the project on the target group.||Often there are no identical groups and methodological know-how is required if control groups have to be reconstituted. The choice of the control group is no small matter.|
|The cost of data collection (2 measurements) is often justifiable.||There is no link to the planned objectives. It is not known whether and to what extent the organisation has achieved its objective.|
|No assertions can be made about the project’s sustainability.|
A comparison with a control group is more meaningful and therefore better suited to legitimising a project, as long as suitable control groups are available or can be constituted, and as long as there are no ethical reservations. It is used in cases where there is a lack of data about the initial situation or where these can only be obtained at great cost.