Beyond the Numbers: Why Qualitative Data Matters in Evaluating Out-of-School Time Programs
In the world of out-of-school time (OST) programs—whether afterschool initiatives, summer learning, or youth leadership opportunities—data-driven decision-making often centers on numbers: attendance rates, academic benchmarks, behavioral incidents, and survey scores. While these metrics are important, they rarely tell the full story of what makes programs meaningful or how youth grow and thrive.
To truly understand what makes OST programs meaningful and effective, we must go beyond numbers and listen to the voices behind them. That’s where qualitative data—gathered through interviews, focus groups, observations, reflective journaling, and open-ended surveys—comes in. It adds depth, context, and a human perspective that quantitative data alone cannot provide.
This post explores how qualitative data deepens understanding, strengthens equity, and drives continuous improvement across key areas of OST practice—from youth voice and inclusion to implementation, evaluation, and community trust.
Listening to Youth and Staff Voices
Attendance tells us who shows up, but not why they stay—or leave. Qualitative data reveals young people's motivations, challenges, and sense of connection, which are central to program impact. Staff insights—gathered through interviews, observations, or reflections—shed light on what’s working and how programming can adapt to better support youth.
Example: A 21st CCLC STEM program might report steady participation rates. But focus groups with youth could reveal that the activities feel disconnected from their interests or real-world experiences—insights that can guide more engaging and culturally responsive programming by aligning STEM topics with what students find relevant and practical.
Revealing Context and Complexity
OST programs operate in diverse neighborhoods and serve young people with varied backgrounds and needs. What works in one site may not work in another due to differences in staff capacity, community partnerships, or local context. Qualitative data uncovers these nuances.
Example: Two community centers implement the same mentorship model. In one, youth outcomes improve; in the other, they remain stagnant. Observations and interviews may reveal differences in mentor training, support, or matching—insights the second program can use to strengthen its approach and foster similar growth.
Highlighting Equity and Inclusion
While quantitative metrics help measure outcomes, they can mask disparities—especially among historically marginalized youth. Qualitative methods shed light on how different groups truly experience programs, and whether they feel seen, supported, and safe.
Example: A program may report increased enrollment of LGBTQ+ youth or youth of color, yet interviews might surface microaggressions, feelings of exclusion, or unmet needs not captured in survey data. Listening to these lived experiences can surface systemic barriers, spark honest conversations, and lead to meaningful change.
Evaluating Implementation, Not Just Outcomes
Knowing whether an OST initiative met its goals isn’t enough—we also need to understand how it was implemented. Qualitative data reveals real-time adaptations, implementation fidelity, and the on-the-ground challenges staff navigate.
Example: A literacy enrichment program shows uneven results across sites. Staff reflections and site visits might reveal that some sites lacked adequate materials, while others modified the curriculum to better suit their group—factors that can shape both outcomes and youth experience.
Enabling Continuous Improvement
Annual reports often come too late to guide day-to-day practice. In contrast, qualitative feedback offers timely, real-world insights that support reflection, continuous learning, and responsive adjustments.
Example: A youth development program might hold monthly youth circles or use weekly journal prompts to gather reflections. These insights help staff fine-tune pacing, introduce relevant activities, or recalibrate group dynamics in real time—fostering more responsive, engaging programming.
Strengthening Mixed Methods Approaches
When paired with quantitative data, qualitative insights offer a fuller, more meaningful picture. Numbers show what’s happening—stories help explain why. Together, they strengthen evaluation and lead to better-informed decisions.
Example: Survey data might show high satisfaction, while qualitative insights amplify those results—highlighting what youth value most, such as strong relationships or engaging activities, while also pointing to areas for deeper growth, like leadership opportunities or greater voice in decision-making.
Fostering Trust and Community Engagement
When youth, families, and community members are asked to share their stories and experiences, it fosters trust and connection. This participatory approach fosters mutual respect, builds ownership, and deepens community trust—laying the foundation for stronger programming.
Example: Before revising its long-standing afterschool model, a school district hosted listening sessions with youth and caregivers. Their feedback helped shape a new approach that was more inclusive, trauma-informed, and aligned with community values.
Bringing It All Together
Out-of-school time (OST) programs are about more than participation rates or academic benchmarks—they’re about connection, identity, culture, and belonging. While quantitative data helps measure reach and track progress, it often misses the deeper dynamics shaping youth experiences. Qualitative data fills these gaps, uncovering the “why” behind the numbers and elevating the voices of those most impacted.
To truly understand what’s working—and what needs to change—we must value lived experience alongside metrics. When OST programs incorporate qualitative methods regularly, build staff capacity to use them well, and treat feedback as a tool for reflection and growth, evaluation becomes more than compliance—it becomes a pathway to equity, responsiveness, and continuous improvement. Listening to the stories behind the stats is how we build programs that not only perform well but truly serve young people and their communities.
