Comparing QuIP with thirty other approaches to impact evaluation

This resource outlines how the Qualitative Impact Protocol (QuIP) compares to 30 other impact evaluation approaches. 

Authors and their affiliation

James Copestake, Professor at Centre Development Studies University of Bath; Director, Bath SDR 

Key features

This resource provides a broad overview of thirty different approaches to impact evaluation. The table includes a short description of each method and explains how the QuIP fairs in comparison. Essentially it is a brief look at how QuIP is inspired by, fits in with, and compares to other well used approaches. 

How have you used or intend on using this resource?

This is very useful resource as it provides a quick reference point for various impact evaluation methods. It is helpful for understanding and comparing different approaches used in the field. 

Why would you recommend it to other people?

It is particularly beneficial for those considering using a QuIP research design to see how it compares to other methods. 


Copestake, J. (2022). Comparing QuIP with thirty other approaches to impact evaluation. In J. Copestake, M. Morsink, & F. Remnant (Eds.), Attributing Development Impact: The qualitative impact protocol case book. Retrieved from:

'Comparing QuIP with thirty other approaches to impact evaluation' is referenced in: