Tom from The Mission Motor here (have also done some more general M&E consulting in the EA space).

In my opinion, there is a lot of room for growth in M&E best practice in the (non-global development) EA space. There is often an appetite for M&E, but there is a real lack of knowledge and expertise. This to me presents a big opportunity where behaviour change is  needed and also easier to obtain (though still not easy).

You can also have a snowball effect if you change the norms in the EA space. Personally, I feel like current concepts of measuring progress and impact in (again, mostly non-global dev) EA spaces are rudimentary. For example, we tend to focus on speculative cost-effective analysis as the primary method of assessing projects, even when they are still in the ideation phase. I believe this is, at least in part, because there is not an understanding of alternate M&E tools (e.g. setting up a good monitoring system for evaluating a theory of change).

I exclude the global development space as ideas from groups like IPA and IDInsight have permeated more there. 

So my opinion would be strongly pro-working with EAs.

Reminds me of 2019, strongly upvoted and sent to a few people.

Some thoughts that come to mind:

• Should we work with EA-aligned orgs to support them methodologically with their impact management and MEL, or with non-EA orgs to motivate them to shift towards a more EA-aligned approach regarding impact management? Either is fine, or rather, both are broken in their own ways :)
• In practice, impact measurement and related concerns seem to become more salient when people are trying to fundraise. You might want to time your appeals with funding rounds. For instance, offer to help people think through their theory of impact as they are applying to an SFF round.
• My intuition might be to seek to attach yourself to large orgs (Charity Entrepeneurship, Animal Charity Evaluators, Anima International, Open Philanthropy, EA Funds, etc.) that might have a larger appetite for the type of service you are offering.
• How much do you charge?

1. Should we work with EA-aligned orgs to support them methodologically with their impact management and MEL, or with non-EA orgs to motivate them to shift towards a more EA-aligned approach regarding impact management?
   1. Not sure, both options have their merits. The Mission Motor is focused on doing the latter for animal welfare organisations, maybe touch base with them to see what their experience has been (if you haven't already).
2. Do you know EA-related orgs that could need support with impact planning (e.g. with developing a Theory of Change), tracking, or analysis?
   1. I know lots of city and national organisations funded by the Centre for Effective Altruism's Community Building Grants programme would like to improve their M&E (including ourselves at EA Netherlands, but we've already got outside support). Perhaps you could contact Naomi, who is responsible for this programme.
3. What is your intuition on the level of capacity spent on and knowledge about impact management in EA organizations?
   1. I'm most familiar with community-building EA organisations like ourselves. My impression is that EA CB orgs tend to do better than the average non-profit, but we're still nowhere near as good as we ought to be.
4. Do you work for an organization yourself (or know one well) that might want to build a ToC with us or do a tracking or measurement workshop?
   1. At EA Netherlands we're already getting outside support with our M&E but I think other national organisations would be interested. Again, I'd consider contacting Naomi from CEA. Right now she's putting together the programme for our next retreat and several requests have been made for M&E training.