Turning the Mirror: How We Collect Data that People Trust and Actually Use

By Cori Egan, Partner
At Lumen Impact Group, we take data collection seriously, but not stiffly. One of the Lumen Ladies said it best in a recent team meeting: good data starts with making people comfortable and asking good questions. That simple reminder guides everything we do, from a hallway conversation with a teacher to a statewide scan of policy trends.
Below is a quick look at how we blend human-centered conversations with by-the-book research methods to help schools, nonprofits, and state agencies see what’s really happening and act on it.
Start with people, not just numbers
When we support a strategic planning or expansion process, we “turn the mirror” for our partners. That means talking with people inside the system so leaders can see what’s happening under the hood clearly, and without judgement.
- In a school: we may interview principals, teacher teams, and student support staff; run focus groups with parents; and meet with board members. We explain why we’re there, how their input will be used, and how we’ll protect confidentiality. The result is candid insight: what’s working, what’s shaky, and where energy for change already exists.
- In a nonprofit: we could speak with staff across roles, clients/members, and potentially funders to map strengths, priorities, bottlenecks, and mission alignment.
- In a state agency: we might connect program leaders with front-line implementers to surface policy-to-practice gaps and real-world constraints.
The goal in all cases is the same: create a safe space, ask clear questions, and listen for patterns, not just opinions.
Do it “by the book” (and make it feel human)
Warm conversations still deserve rigorous methods. Our data team is trained in both qualitative and quantitative research, and we use standard, transparent practices because we know:
- Semi-structured protocols keep interviews focused while allowing authentic stories to surface.
- Sampling with intent (multiple roles, campuses, socioeconomic groups) brings more diversity of perspective to feedback.
- Anonymized notes and confidentiality reduce risk for the participant and encourage candor.
- Triangulation cross-checks themes from interviews, surveys, and performance data to make sure we keep the analysis true to the data.
- Member checking (anonymously repeating back emerging findings mid-interview) helps us ensure we heard people right and to discern whether others agree with what we’ve heard.
Pair voices with visible facts to tell the story
Conversation alone doesn’t steer sense-making for the path forward; it needs to connect to hard data. We bring together:
- Quantitative indicators: like enrollment and attendance trends, assessment growth, staff retention, survey data, and budget and program metrics.
- Qualitative insights: like stakeholder perspectives, focus groups, visioning that asks stakeholders to dream about what is possible, and observation data.
The synthesis is where the insight lives. For example: If staffing data shows that turnover has been greater than 25% for three consecutive years, and staff focus groups highlight burnout, that their voice isn’t heard, or frustration with opportunities for growth and development, then together the numbers and voices point toward investing in a stronger organizational culture and creating clear opportunities for advancement.
Why this approach works
- Trust unlocks truth. When people feel safe, you hear what performance dashboards can’t show.
- Rigor prevents drift. Standard methods keep insights reliable and decisions defensible.
- Synthesis drives action. Voices + numbers = priorities you can implement Monday morning.
If you’re looking to collect data to inform your future direction, whether you are a school, nonprofit, or state agency, we’d love to help you turn the mirror, see clearly, and move confidently. Let’s make your data feel human and your decisions feel clear.