1. www.bakertilly.co.uk
Jim Clifford OBE
Scientific and Technical Chair, GECES Sub-group
Co-founder and Chair, IAAM Adoption (SE)
E: j.clifford@bwbllp.com
T: +44 (0) 7860 386081
@Clifford_Jim
Impact Evaluation by Social Enterprises:
Measuring the un-measurable ?
For OECD Conference – Stockholm April 2014

2. 2
Programme
1. What is social impact and how we measure it ?
2. The standardisation debate
3. The opportunities and the risks

3. What is social impact.......?
Views from Maas and Liket “Do we know what we are talking about”
at ARNOVA 2011
Four key elements :
•Value created as a consequence of someone’s activity
(Emerson, Wachowicz & Chun, 2000)
•Value created is that experienced by beneficiaries and all
others affected (Kolodinsky, Stewart, & Bullard, 2006)
•Impact is the sum of both positive and negative effects
(Wainwright, 2002)
•It must be judged against a benchmark of what would have
been the status without the activity (Clark, Rosenzweig, Long, & Olsen,
2004)
3

4. Definitions from the GECES report
Social Relating to individuals and communities, and the
interaction between them; contrasted with economic
and environmental.
4
Social Outcome Social effect (change), both long-term and short-term
achieved for the target population as a result of the
activity undertaken with a view to social change taking
into account both positive and negative changes.
Social Impact The reflection of social outcomes as measurements,
both long-term and short-term, adjusted for the effects
achieved by others (alternative attribution), for effects
that would have happened anyway (deadweight), for
negative consequences (displacement), and for effects
declining over time (drop-off).
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/social_business/docs/expert-
group/20131128-impact-measurement-subgroup_en.pdf

5. Inputs Activities Outputs Outcomes Impacts
Where do outcomes fit ?...
Primary Secondary
5

6. Why measure ……?
Plan
Engage
Monitor
and control
Improve
Report and
learn
Internal
External
• For funders (commissioners) in
Government
• In emergent EU legislation
• For prioritisation decisions
• For delivery measures in contracts
• For effectiveness and its
improvement
• For philanthropists and grant-
makers
• In social finance/investment
• in competing for capital
•..and in public scrutiny
6

7. What is “good” measurement…..
For measurement to be effective it must be:
• relevant: related to, and arise from the outcomes it is measuring;
• helpful: in meeting the needs of stakeholders’, both internal and external;
• simple: both in how the measurement is made, and in how it is presented;
• natural: arising from the normal flow of activity to outcome;
• certain: both in how it is derived, and in how it is presented;
• understood and accepted: by all relevant stakeholders;
• transparent and well-explained: so that the method by which the
measurement is made, and how that relates to the services and outcomes
concerned are clear;
• founded on evidence: so that it can be tested, validated, and form the
grounds for continuous improvement.
7

8. Impact measurement:
How does it work ?
Impact = Σ Outcomes – (deadweight + alternative attribution + displacement)
Deadweight
The outcome that would have happened anyway
Alternative attribution
The outcome that arose as a result of other interventions – importance of recognising the work of others
Displacement
The disadvantage or reduction in positive outcome, or social cost arising as a consequence
8

9. What’s happening out there…..?
• Developing the discussion and
the network at the “top table” –
GECES sub-group is part of this
• Common frameworks, e.g.
• Outcomes matrix (BSC et al)
• CECOP (Fr) and others
• Inspiring Impact (npc)
• Good Investor Guide (BSC/Investing for
Good)
• EVPA “A Practical Guide to Impact
Measurement” (first draft)
• Social Reporting Standard (Germany)
• Drive from Investors and the
changing Social Investment
Market,
• Conflicting political and cultural
ideologies
• E3M Impact Measurement for
Social Enterprise: Common
threads and differences
• European Commission interest
under the Social Business
Initiative – GECES sub-group
supporting:
• PSCI £90m grant fund
• EUSEFs
• Influence of public sector
• Influence of innovative Ses
• Emerging influence of the G8
group

10. Standardisation: help or hindrance
Help ?
• Comparability
• Benchmarking for
improvement
• Supported investment
decisions
• Engagement with outsiders
using a common language
• Support idea-sharing
Hindrance ?
• “one size fits all”
• Lose the story and devalue it
• Supporting false
comparability
• Develop a two-tier landscape
10
THINK…..Embracing something
that’s workable and then
developing it further avoids others
introducing something less
helpful………….

11. The search for standardisation…
11

12. The search for standardisation…
12

13. The search for standardisation…
13

14. The search for standardisation…
14

15. The search for standardisation…
15

16. The search for standardisation…
16

17. ……..and then…
…risks and opportunities..
Timing
• Actual measurement is needed and is
happening
• Standardisation is being sought as the market
grows and needs it
• G8 group should develop its proposals guided
by a clear European Statement
Choices:
• Draw together common good SE-led practice
• Move to a single protocol: one size fits all
• Leave it to investors and others to determine
the solution
GECES sub-group report
• Clear inclusive statement
• Drawing together existing knowledge and
diversity (10 States; 19 experts; 25+ others)
• Social Enterprise-driven
• Sensitive to European culture and diversity
• Embracing large and small
• Embracing a diversity of methodologies
• With flexibility for future growth and
intelligent development
• As a foundation……
17

18. And the key message of impact
measurement……..?
Story-telling
..by social enterprises
…about their worlds
……in the ways that best suit those stories
18