Evaluating for Sustainability: Evaluation of Title III Strengthening Institutions Grants

Many colleges and universities approach Title III grants as a way to launch new programs, improve student services, or modernize campus systems. Those goals matter. But the strongest Title III projects do something larger: they help institutions build lasting capacity.

That is why evaluation should be viewed as more than a reporting requirement. A well-designed evaluation helps institutions determine whether project changes are actually becoming part of the institution’s long-term operations.

In our work evaluating Title III grants, one issue consistently emerges: sustainability cannot be treated as a final-year discussion. Institutions that wait until Year 4 or Year 5 to think about sustainability are often too late.

The most successful projects begin planning for institutionalization at the start of the grant.

This distinction matters because many Title III initiatives begin as “special projects.” They may depend on temporary staff positions, grant-funded technology, or a small group of highly committed faculty and administrators. Early implementation may look successful, but if the work is not integrated into institutional structures, it can disappear once funding ends.

We have seen this challenge across many types of Title III activities, including advising reform, developmental education redesign, online learning expansion, student success initiatives, and workforce-focused program development.

For example, a college may hire grant-funded advisors who significantly improve student support services. But the long-term question is whether the institution eventually adopts those positions within its regular operating budget and advising structure. Similarly, faculty may redesign courses or pilot new instructional practices during the grant period, but those improvements are far more likely to continue when they become embedded into ongoing faculty development systems and academic planning processes. There is where evaluation becomes important.

Strong Title III evaluation goes beyond tracking outputs such as the number of workshops held, students served, or courses redesigned. Those metrics are necessary, but they are not enough. Evaluation should also examine whether the institution is building the systems, leadership support, policies, and internal ownership needed to sustain the work over time.

Federal guidance and emerging higher education evaluation literature increasingly emphasize this broader view of institutional change. Current discussions around sustainability in higher education focus on issues such as organizational readiness, cross-department collaboration, leadership alignment, continuous improvement, and institutional ownership of innovation.

In practice, this means evaluators should pay close attention to institutional context. Leadership turnover, staffing shortages, enrollment pressures, and reorganizations can all affect implementation. Even strong projects can lose momentum if they are not connected to institutional priorities and systems.

This is one reason qualitative methods are so valuable in Title III evaluation. Interviews, focus groups, implementation reviews, and sustainability assessments often reveal important issues before they appear in performance data. Faculty and staff may identify gaps in communication, uncertainty about long-term funding, or concerns about workload and institutional support. These conversations can help institutions make mid-course corrections while there is still time to strengthen the project.

Another important lesson is that sustainability is rarely tied to a single activity. Instead, it develops through repeated integration into institutional practice. Projects become sustainable when faculty, staff, and administrators begin to view them not as grant activities, but as part of how the institution operates.

Ultimately, the best Title III evaluations do more than document compliance. They help colleges and universities understand whether they are creating meaningful institutional change. When evaluation is approached this way, it becomes a practical tool for decision-making, strategic planning, and long-term improvement and not simply an annual reporting exercise.

Shaffer Evaluation Group has conducted project evaluations of Title III Strengthening Institutions grants since 2014. Our team has also provided grant writing support for Title III grant applications. If your institution is applying for a Title III grant and looking for an evaluation partner, please reach out to us at seg@shafferevaluation.com.