This document discusses building the evidential quality of evaluations in humanitarian settings. It begins by noting that most evidence in humanitarian work falls into the weakest categories of a hierarchy of evidence or lies outside the pyramid. It then discusses various types of evidence collection methods and their strengths and weaknesses, including expert opinion, case studies, randomized controlled trials, and different sampling methods. It raises challenges of ignoring evidence, biases in data collection, and how to properly evaluate humanitarian programs and assess their validity, relevance, feasibility of implementation, sustainability, wider impacts, and costs.