Implementation evaluation - Scottish Funding Council

Register with us

Implementation evaluation of the Outcomes Framework and Assurance Model and Scotland’s Tertiary Quality Enhancement Framework

Evaluation enables the Scottish Funding Council (SFC) to understand what works, strengthening our impact and ensuring our investments support a coherent, high-performing tertiary education sector.

SFC is launching an early implementation evaluation of the Outcomes Framework and Assurance Model (OFAM) and Scotland’s Tertiary Quality Enhancement Framework (TQEF).

The Outcomes Framework sets out SFC’s expectations of colleges and universities in return for the funding that they receive. The Assurance Model is the mechanism by which SFC is assured that the Outcomes in the Framework are being delivered.

The TQEF and its delivery mechanisms inform the “High quality learning and teaching” outcome of the Outcomes Framework and the outputs of the TQEF support the monitoring aspects of the Assurance Model.

Invitations to stakeholders will go out shortly, with data collection starting in February and a report of the learning available in Summer 2026.

Why is implementation evaluation important?

Implementation evaluation is important to explore the barriers and facilitators in the adoption of OFAM and for the TQEF. Key implementation priorities for both frameworks are that they reduce burden for institutions, making greater use of existing data and sources of information. The approaches prioritise our relationships with institutions, recognising institutional autonomy. The approach should also allow SFC to better contextualise data returns and to work with institutions to address any issues in a timely manner.

SFC has been gathering insights on the implementation from our internal workforce within the first year; additionally, institutional implementation feedback is built into the quarterly engagement meetings with the institutions. These approaches were included to support fast cycle iteration. As per SFC’s evaluation principles of rigour, inclusivity, collaboration and transparency, we also want to provide a neutral space for the institutions and, for TQEF, the delivery partners to share their insights and experiences of implementing the frameworks.

For TQEF, the implementation evaluation is part of a systematic framework evaluation which will include outcome and impact evaluation at later stages.

What will the early implementation evaluation look at?

The evaluation aims to assess how these frameworks are being implemented. It will look at:

Sector-level alignment: How well do the frameworks fit with national policy and standards? Are they being implemented consistently across the sector?
System-level impact: Do the frameworks reduce reporting burdens and support effective, diverse institutional practices? Are institutions using data and feedback to drive improvement?
Individual-level support: Do staff and students have the resources, training, and support needed to make these frameworks work?

How has the evaluation work evolved?

Following the collaborative approach to developing the frameworks, we have undertaken a mixture of internal activities and working with stakeholders to refine the Theory of Change and identify key areas for exploration. Ongoing stakeholder engagement has shaped the implementation evaluation and will continue to inform future stages.

Who is involved?

At this stage the evaluation will focus on stakeholders that are directly involved in the implementation of the frameworks to assess whether they are functioning as intended.

The stakeholders directly involved in implementation include the institutional outcome and assurance leads, the TQEF delivery partners (Quality Assurance Agency [QAA], College Development Network [CDN], Student Partnerships in Quality Scotland [sparqs] and Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework Partnership [SCQFP]), quality leads, student representatives and institutional leadership.

A theory-informed sampling strategy will be used to select institutions to participate in interviews. This enables exploration of the frameworks within different contexts and, for TQEF, at different stages of undertaking the mechanisms. A survey will also be disseminated providing an opportunity for all institutions to share their insights. The methods will prompt respondents to reflect on, and where helpful seek out the views of others who have had a key role in implementation of the frameworks within their institutions; for example, Principals, Vice Principals, Planners, Quality Leads or academics etc. For the purposes of the OFAM we are also interested in gathering feedback from institutional chairs.

The work is being undertaken by an external consultant to ensure that those who choose to take part have an independent space to share reflections.

What is the relationship between OFAM and TQEF for the purposes of the evaluation?

OFAM and TQEF are closely connected; TQEF is one framework with several mechanisms that functions within OFAM to support the ‘High Quality Learning & Teaching’ outcome. Within some institutions, the individuals responsible for aspects of OFAM or TQEF might be the same. We recognise this and, although we have included specific questions regarding TQEF for quality leads, we also understand that some roles may wish to offer feedback spanning all areas. The intention is to avoid unnecessary duplication or burden as a key aspect to the frameworks is that they are aligned.

In what ways are the evaluations of activities within the frameworks brought into the learning?

SFC is working closely with the TQEF delivery partners (QAA, CDN and sparqs) to ensure that the outcomes of the individual delivery mechanisms of the TQEF (e.g., Tertiary Quality Enhancement Reviews [TQER] and Scotland’s Tertiary Enhancement Programme [STEP]) are integrated effectively into the overall evaluation of the TQEF.

How are other new processes within the OFAM such as the Research Assurance and Accountability (RAA) being evaluated?

The evaluation focuses on the implementation of OFAM overall and supports the longer-term evaluation of mechanisms that are driving change in educational practice, specifically the TQEF. The Research Assurance and Accountability (RAA) return, while an important component of OFAM, functions as an assurance and monitoring process to provide oversight and confirmation of compliance rather than as a change mechanism.

As such a discrete implementation evaluation of the RAA, or other individual reporting mechanisms within OFAM would not be proportionate or methodologically aligned with the aims of the evaluation. However, it is anticipated that relevant interface issues may be captured where they effect the implementation of OFAM more broadly.

How will the learning from the early implementation evaluation be used?

We will share a report of the learning in Summer 2026. The findings will help us to understand what is working and where there are opportunities for fine tuning.

SFC will use the insights from the implementation evaluation to help inform the scope of the outcome and impact evaluation.

What’s next?

The OFAM is an approach for assurance and monitoring of institutional performance, aiming to reduce reporting burden and duplication. The routine monitoring data and service delivery feedback will continue to be used to review if OFAM is achieving its objectives.

The TQEF includes the enhancement of learning and teaching through its different mechanisms, as such we will be looking at the outcomes and impact of TQEF overall. The outline evaluation plan for TQEF is:

Phase 1: Implementation evaluation report Summer 2026,
Phase 2: Early to mid-term, 2027 – 2029, subject to phase 1 learning.
Phase 3: Impact evaluation, subject to phase 1 and 2 learning.

We will continue to share updates as the evaluation progresses.