Solving the Early Childhood Program Evaluation Paradox: Re-envisioning Evidence via the CIRCLE Framework

Solving the Early Childhood Program Evaluation Paradox: Re-envisioning Evidence via the CIRCLE Framework

Philip Fisher & Kathryn Beauchamp

The Stanford Center on Early Childhood Working Paper Series

September 2025

Despite decades of investment in early childhood programs and an evidence base demonstrating their positive impacts, the field continues to face significant challenges in the selection and implementation of evaluation methodology. 

This creates issues for policy makers, advocates, and funders who seek to understand the impact of early childhood investments. It also results in impediments in identifying the optimal approaches to supporting young children, their parents, and other adults in their lives and understanding variations in impacts of investments. 

This paper examines contemporary issues in early childhood program evaluation, focusing particularly on the limitations of randomized controlled trials, overreliance on average treatment effects, and insufficient attention to variation in program impacts across and within different populations. Drawing on recent advances in developmental science and evaluation methodology, the authors propose the Continuous Improvement Rapid Cycle Learning and Evaluation (CIRCLE) framework that embraces a continuum of evaluation approaches, prioritizes understanding of impact variation, and emphasizes greater precision in theories of change.