Measurement Methodology
We use the same validated instruments that academic and clinical researchers use. Third-party evaluators — not Thrive Grant staff — administer every assessment.
Why This Approach
The most effective way to demonstrate that our programs produce real outcomes is to speak the language of the people who set the standards. The instruments we use are the same ones cited in peer-reviewed psychiatric literature, used by the VA, referenced by NIMH, and validated across large-scale clinical trials. When our data shows improvement on PHQ-9 or GAD-7, it means something — not because we say so, but because these tools have been independently validated by thousands of researchers before us.
We believe transparency is not optional. Measurement must be rigorous, independent, and publicly accessible. This page exists so that anyone — a researcher, a journalist, a skeptical donor, or a prospective participant — can examine exactly how we measure what we claim to measure.
Validated Instruments
Each instrument below is a standardized, evidence-based tool with established scoring, normative data, and clinical cutoffs published in peer-reviewed literature.
A 9-item self-report questionnaire that scores each item on a scale of 0–3 (not at all to nearly every day). Total scores range from 0–27. Widely used in primary care and research settings. Scores of 10 or above are associated with major depressive disorder.
A 7-item scale measuring the severity of generalized anxiety over the past two weeks. Scores range from 0–21. Widely validated as a screening tool and outcome measure for anxiety symptoms in both clinical and research contexts.
A 20-item self-report measure assessing PTSD symptom severity aligned with DSM-5 diagnostic criteria. Scores range from 0–80. Developed by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs National Center for PTSD. A score of 31–33 or above is provisionally diagnostic for PTSD.
A 19-item self-rated instrument covering sleep quality, latency, duration, efficiency, disturbances, medication use, and daytime dysfunction over the past month. Global scores above 5 indicate poor sleep quality. One of the most widely cited sleep assessment tools in the literature.
A 36-item scale developed by the WHO measuring functional limitations across six domains: cognition, mobility, self-care, getting along, life activities, and participation. Directly linked to the International Classification of Functioning (ICF). Used in DSM-5 as a measure of disability.
A 36-item survey measuring eight domains of health: physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health, role limitations due to emotional problems, energy/fatigue, emotional well-being, social functioning, pain, and general health. One of the most widely used health status instruments globally, with normative data available across populations.
Independent Administration
All assessments are administered and scored by independent, third-party evaluators who are not affiliated with Thrive Grant Foundation, not involved in program delivery, and have no financial stake in outcomes.
Thrive Grant staff do not administer, score, or have access to individual assessment data during the program period. This separation is intentional and non-negotiable. It is the only way to ensure that our data is trustworthy.
Collection Timeline
Assessments are collected at five defined time points to capture baseline, in-program progress, and sustained outcomes well beyond program completion.
Baseline Assessment
All six instruments administered before program begins. Establishes individual baseline scores. No intervention has occurred. This is the comparison point for all subsequent measurements.
In-Program Monitoring
Assessments repeated monthly throughout the 4-month grant period. Captures trajectory, not just endpoints. Allows identification of when changes occur and whether they are sustained within the program window.
Post-Program Assessment
Final in-program assessment at program conclusion. Primary outcome measurement. Compared against baseline to calculate change scores. Forms the basis of the published results for each cycle.
6-Month Follow-up
Follow-up assessment conducted 6 months after program ends. Measures whether outcomes are sustained after grant funding ceases. Most outcome studies lack long-term follow-up — we consider this essential.
12-Month Follow-up
Final scheduled follow-up at 12 months post-program. Tests durability of change over a full year. Participants who have continued any program independently will be asked to note this — it is tracked as a variable, not excluded.
How Results Are Published
Public Data Page
Aggregate and individual (pseudonymized, consented) data published on Current Cycle Results after each cycle concludes. Includes change scores from baseline, standard deviations, and effect sizes.
Downloadable Dataset
Full anonymized dataset available as CSV for independent analysis. Any researcher may download and re-analyze our data. We do not gatekeep results.
PDF Summary Report
Narrative summary report published alongside the data, written for a general audience. Includes evaluation methodology, limitations, and interpretation guidelines.
Archive
All past cycles remain accessible indefinitely in the Outcomes Archive. We do not remove unfavorable data.