Thank you, Eleonora, for sharing these insights and links. 

Maybe you can find something here: https://www.hfes.org//Web/Default.aspx

they have apparently a similar ethics as the one behind your approach.

just an idea from my side: reform is possibly not sharp enough to provide decent handles to look for success and failures. So maybe you could start by narrowing the questions to health or whatever and go deeper to become more specific.

one example: there has been a big debate about smoking as a risk. For years still smoking has been advertised without pointing towards these risks. Now in Switzerland advertising has almost disappeared and packages of tobacca have large announcement, that there are severe risks.

so in this example the political change followed by measures, enforcements etc. could be the reform, then success and failure could be found in numbers of tobacco consumption, incidence of lung diseases etc.

hope this helps and good luck

Thank you, Hans. Yes, it is sometimes easy to have a narrow topic and long enough time-frame to measure, for example, incidence of lung cancer or so. Yet, sometimes when we are looking on transformation of health or social care institutions, shifts in welfare programmes and we do not have enough time or enough data  to measure changes. While short- and long-term outcomes may differ.

Hi Tetyano, you might find this website useful 

http://betterevaluation.org/

Thank you, Maria, the website is a really useful source

It's a good discussion and valuable references

Варто було б співставити намічені цілі рефом та отримані результати. Можна зробити економічний аналіз витрат, зумовлених реформами, та порахувати пряму вигоду від проведення реформ, зробити макросоціальні та макродемографічні розрахунки (якщо наявна належна статистична інформація)

Можливо, э сенс придивитися до індикаторів, які сформульовані для Цілей сталого розвитку?

Гарні ідеї. Дякую!