Impact & Evaluation

Measuring whether recognition becomes action.

The intervention is evaluated through the RE-AIM framework, paired with post-viewing surveys, platform analytics, organizational practice-change documentation, and youth experience indexing.

Program Goals

1
Address conditions surrounding TGNC youth without placing prevention responsibility on youth.
2
Connect lived experience with reflection and practical resources for earlier response.
3
Provide prevention-oriented information outside homelessness and crisis-response systems.

Theory of Change

TMM's theory of change traces a path from the conditions that put TGNC youth at risk to the structural shifts that protect them, grounded in two bodies of research.

Stage 1

Conditions Shaping Risk

Family rejection, institutional barriers, identity invalidation, unsafe or inconsistent service experiences, anti-trans rhetoric, stigma, conditional support, and service avoidance.

Stage 2

Audiences for Change

Concern, uncertainty, conflicting messages, or a desire to better support TGNC youth can leave individuals unsure how to respond or where to turn.

Stage 3

The S-3E Change Model

Story: Lived experience through the TMM mini-series deepens understanding of TGNC youth experiences.
Examine: Reflecting on these perspectives helps audiences recognize how assumptions and stigma shape whether support feels safe, affirming, and accessible.
Equip: Connecting reflection to DYUR, Q-Nife, and the TMM platform provides practical resources audiences can use within their roles and settings.
Enact: Applying understanding and resources can support earlier, intentional responses within the environments surrounding TGNC youth.

Stage 4

Intended Change

Earlier recognition, greater readiness to respond, and prevention-oriented response.

Theoretical framework

Stigma Theory

Recurring stigma can become embedded in relationships, institutions, and systems that shape belonging and access to support.

Transformative Learning Theory

Exposure to new perspectives can prompt reflection on existing assumptions, shaping how individuals understand available resources and respond within their roles and settings.

Outcomes we track

Short-term (0-6 months)

Greater recognition of practices associated with exclusion and housing instability risk.
Increased understanding of how stigma can affect belonging and access to support.
Greater knowledge of available resources and where to locate additional support.
Increased reported readiness to respond when exclusion or disconnection is recognized.
Audience experience of TMM content as clear and respectful.
Engagement that extends beyond documentary viewing into other areas of the TMM ecosystem.

Mid-term (6-18 months)

Continued use of TMM resources within family, community, professional, and institutional settings.
Documented organizational use of DYUR and other companion materials.
Sustained engagement with the digital ecosystem across multiple episodes or reporting periods.
Earlier use of prevention-oriented information within the environments surrounding TGNC youth.
Ongoing revisions informed by stakeholder participation and evaluation findings.
Identification of adaptations needed when TMM components are used in other settings.

Long-term

Earlier engagement with supportive systems before housing instability becomes more severe.
Reduced service avoidance associated with stigma or prior mistreatment.
Stronger conditions that support continued connection between TGNC youth and available sources of support.
More consistent prevention-oriented responses within the environments surrounding TGNC youth.
Sustained use and adaptation of TMM resources across different settings.
Stronger conditions associated with housing stability for TGNC youth.

RE-AIM evaluation framework

Each tool in the ecosystem is evaluated across the five RE-AIM dimensions, with dedicated indicators developed in partnership with youth, providers, and the Design Lab.

Reach: Who is exposed to the intervention, and which audiences are reached at which moments.
Effectiveness: Did recognition change behavior, practice, or a young person's willingness to stay connected?
Adoption: Which organizations integrate the DYUR Toolkit or Q-Nife Family Resources into ongoing practice?
Implementation: How consistently and faithfully are the tools used across sites and roles?
Maintenance: What sustains the intervention: governance, funding, design labs, and updates over time?

What "impact" looks like in this work

We will not claim that a video prevents homelessness. We will document whether adults responded differently in a moment, whether an organization changed a form, whether a young person came back to a service that once turned them away. Those shifts (small, structural, repeatable) are the measurable upstream signals that housing stability becomes more likely.