Activity.
What XTF or a participant did: a session, review, test, conversation, prototype cycle or publication.
Foundation / Impact
Name the change. Name the limits.
XTF intends to report progress in a way that separates what happened, what was produced, what was learned and what change the available evidence can reasonably support.
No XTF impact report has been published yet. This page sets the reporting standard; it does not claim results.
Impact is not the largest number available.
Evidence should be proportionate to the claim.
A workshop held, a prototype built and a participant reporting new confidence can all matter. They are not the same kind of result, and none automatically proves a durable change in the world. Responsible reporting keeps those distinctions visible.
XTF’s framework begins with the purpose of a program or project, the people and systems it concerns, the evidence that can reasonably be collected and the risks of turning early activity into an inflated story. It also makes room for negative, mixed and unexpected findings.
Future reports will be published only when the underlying records, definitions and review process are ready.
01 / Levels of evidence
Do not collapse the pathway into one claim.
Each level answers a different question and requires a different form of support.
Output.
What the activity produced: a method, dataset, experiment record, prototype, guide, decision or documented next step.
Learning.
What changed in understanding, capability, method or direction, and how that change was observed or reported.
Short-term change.
What changed for a participant, project, collaborator or defined context within an appropriate period and set of conditions.
Longer-term outcome.
What persisted or developed beyond the immediate program, supported by suitable follow-up and without claiming causation the evidence cannot establish.
02 / What XTF will examine
Four dimensions keep the record useful.
A single metric cannot explain whether early innovation became more rigorous, responsible or capable of continuing.
Did the work become clearer?
Track the question, method, evidence, prototype stage, revisions, limits and next decision rather than only the final presentation.
Did practice change?
Examine capabilities such as inquiry, technical judgment, documentation, collaboration, ethical reasoning and the ability to respond to critique.
Who could use or benefit?
Consider relevance, access, safety, learning, sustainability and the people or systems that may experience benefit, exclusion or harm.
Did XTF provide the right conditions?
Review whether roles, terms, selection, support, safeguarding, rights, communication and correction were clear and appropriate.
03 / Evidence status
Tell readers how a statement is supported.
Important claims should carry enough context to show their source and review status.
Reported by the team
The statement reflects information supplied by a participant or project and has not been independently established.
Supported by a record
The claim connects to a traceable source such as a test log, attendance record, version history, source document or agreed output.
Examined against a method
The evidence and interpretation have been checked through a defined review process, with material questions and limits retained.
Corroborated outside the project
An appropriate source not responsible for the original claim provides relevant support. The source and scope should be named.
A question remains open
The current work does not support the claim. Reporting should say so rather than filling the gap with expectation or anecdote.
The public record changed
A material error or interpretation has been revised, with the nature of the correction and current status made understandable.
04 / Reporting standard
Every result needs a definition and a boundary.
A future report should allow readers to understand what was counted, why it matters and what the record cannot show.
Begin with the intended change
State the program or project purpose and how the reported activity or result relates to it.
Explain what a term means
Define participants, projects, completions, outputs, outcomes and other categories before presenting totals.
Describe how information was gathered
Name the source, collection approach, relevant period, response limits and responsibility for analysis.
Keep conditions visible
Explain program scope, participant route, project stage and other circumstances needed to interpret a statement.
Say what the evidence cannot establish
Identify missing information, selection effects, short follow-up, self-reporting and limits on attribution or generalisation.
Date and correct the record
Show publication and update status, preserve material corrections and provide a contact route for factual concerns.
Some information should not be collected simply because it can be measured.
Protect people while learning from the work.
Impact and evaluation design must consider consent, privacy, data minimisation, security, safeguarding and the effect of asking young people to disclose personal information. Participation in a program should not create an open-ended requirement to be tracked or publicly profiled.
Where participant voice is used, the source and permission should be clear. Individual stories can add context; they should not be treated as proof of a broad outcome.
No XTF impact report or verified impact total is currently published.
Current reporting status.
XTF will not use invented reach numbers, unverified participant totals, projected outcomes or anonymous success stories to fill this page. Verified project records may appear in the Portfolio when evidence and publication permissions are complete.
Institutional reports will be listed here only after their scope, definitions, evidence and review status are ready to examine.
05 / Impact FAQ
Reporting should make scrutiny possible.
These answers explain the standard before XTF has a report to publish.
Has XTF published an impact report?
No. No XTF impact report is currently available. This page defines how future reporting should distinguish activity, outputs, learning and outcomes.
Why are there no impact numbers here?
XTF will publish totals only when the underlying definitions, records, time period and review status are clear enough to interpret responsibly.
Does a prototype count as impact?
A prototype is an output and a way to learn. It may contribute to later change, but it is not automatically evidence of use, benefit or a durable outcome.
Will participant stories be published?
Only with verified context and appropriate consent. A story may illustrate experience, but it will not be presented as proof of a general result.
How will corrections be handled?
Material factual errors or changed interpretations should be reviewed, updated and documented so the current record and nature of the correction are clear.
Where can I see project evidence?
The Portfolio standard explains how verified project records will show questions, methods, evidence, stage, limitations and next steps.