1 presention richard hazenberg
TRANSCRIPT
Social Impact Measurement &
the Social Impact Matrix
Dr Richard Hazenberg
Institute for Social Innovation & Impact
University of Northampton
Presentation Overview
• CEDS/ISII Collaboration
• Social impact measurement – Usual reactions
• Why measure SI?
• How to measure SI?
• Evaluating programmes.
• Social Impact Matrix
– UK
– Vietnam
• Summary
CEDS & ISII
• VNU University of Economics and Business and the University of
Northampton have an institutional partnership based upon a formal
collaboration between the Center for Economic Development
Studies and the Institution for Social Innovation and Impact.
• CEDS and ISII are collaborating to understand the:
– Similarities/differences between SEs in Vietnam/UK.
– Vietnamese/UK needs in relation to SI Measurement.
– Applicability of the SI Matrix to the Vietnamese SE sector.
• This is a British Academy funded project (Newton Fund).
• In the future, to create an online web-based SI Measurement tool for
Vietnamese SEs.
Social Impact Measurement
The usual reactions I often see
when delivering this
presentation…
Stay away, it’s too complicated!
It’s time consuming & boring!
It’s too expensive!
So Why Measure Social
Impact?
• Provides evidence of the impact that you are having.
o Good evidence for stakeholders, funders & beneficiaries.
• Allows for organisational learning.
o Are you always having a positive impact?
• Can help secure contracts/investment. In the UK (NCVO, 2016):
o 81% VCSEs earned through competitive contract delivery (49%
in 2000/01).
o Government funding fell by 44% between 2008 and 2013.
• Transition in third sector relationship with the state/NGOs/investors:
o Desire for evidenced-based policy-making.
o Austerity & scarce resources.
Choosing?
• There is no right or wrong answer, the decision has to be
shaped by you.
• 3 main influencing factors are:
o Motivation
Why are you engaging in SI measurement?
What do you want to get out of it?
What impact do you want it to have?
o Readiness
How soon can you engage in SI measurement?
o Capacity
Staff expertise & time.
Financial resources.
External contacts/networks.
Design Phase Implementation Phase Evaluation Phase
Additional
Stakeholders
Funders
Practitioners
EvaluatorsAND/OR
AND/OR
Outcomes
Impact
Output
Evaluation
ReportMulti-
Interventio
n Design
First Contact
Participant
Evaluation
Interventi
on y
OR
Interventi
on x
Redesig
n
Time 1
Data
Evaluation Design
Hazenberg et al. (2014)
The Social Impact Matrix
Measuring Social Impact
• McLoughlin et al. (2009) developed the SIMPLE
methodology that seeks to measure:
– Outputs: Direct and easily identifiable
(i.e. jobs created).
– Outcomes: Individual beneficiary benefits
(i.e. increased confidence).
– Impact: Wider benefit to society (i.e. reduced social
security payments).
• We combined this approach with an examination of the
triple bottom-line to create the ‘Social Impact Matrix’.
– Economic, social and environmental.
Social Impact
Matrix
Economic
Outputs
Outcomes
Impacts
Specific Tools
Specific Tools
Specific Tools
Social
Outputs
Outcomes
Impacts
Specific Tools
Specific Tools
Specific Tools
Environment
Outputs
Outcomes
Impacts
Specific Tools
Specific Tools
Specific Tools
Social Impact Matrix
CategorySub-category
(where applicable)Data Input Category
Sub-category
(where applicable)Data Input Category
Sub-category
(where applicable)Data Input
Full-time N
Part-time N
Full-time N NI{(Income) - (NIA =
£5,328)] x 1.12 = NIx
Part-time N
Full-time N
Part-time N
Full-time N
Part-time N
Nascent
Entrepreneurs
Supported
NSelf-employment
TaxCorporation Tax
(Profits Made x 1.2)
= Associate's
Corporation Tax
(ACTx)
Start-ups Created N
Early-stagers
SupportedN
Established Enterp.
SupportN
Own Workshop
ProgressionN
Impact Sector
Employment &
Entrepreneurship
Output Outcome
GSE scale
(Schwarzer &
Jerusalem 1995)
Volunteering
N.O. volunteers
engaged in the shop N
Volunteer Hours
WorkedHrs
Social self-efficacy Volunteer SSE
Trainee Volunteer
GSE
Associate
Volunteers
Trainee Volunteers
Employment
Enterprise Support
Café/Shop
Alumni Businesses
Impact
Attitude to
Enterprise
Associate Volunteer
ATE
ATE scale (Athayde,
2009)
(Volunteer hours
worked x £8.80) =
Volunteering fiscal
value (VFVx)
Volunteer Value to
GF
Volunteering
Impact
Unemployment
Benefits
Job-seeker
allowance x N.O.
employeesSelf-employment
welfare (where
applicable)Other benefits
Include where
applicable
SSE Scale (Smith &
Betz 2000)
Income Tax
General self-
efficacy
New employment
tax
New employment
welfare (where
applicable)
[(Income) - (PTA =
£10k)] x 1.2 = Tx
Include where
applicableOther benefits
Unemployment
Benefits
Job-seeker
allowance x N.O.
employees
Example Matrix Section
• When engaging with the University of Northampton and the SI
Matrix, a social enterprise:
– Engages in full meetings with the research team, so that all aspects of the
business & impact can be understood & mapped out.
– Has a holistic SI Matrix produced that details all the areas that they deliver
impact.
– A collaborative process of selecting only key strategic areas for measurement is
undertaken.
– The relevant tools and reporting frameworks, as well as
methodological training, are provided to the social enterprise.
– The social enterprise then collects the data before sending
this to the research team.
– The research team then audits and analyses the data.
– A research report is then produced for the social enterprise,
badged by the University as a sign of independence
and quality.
SIM Process
• An overview of the partners that have engaged with the SI Matrix in
the UK is presented below. In total to date, 42 social enterprises
have engaged with our tool:
SIM Partners in UK
• Our research with CEDs has identified the following barriers to SI
Measurement in the UK & Vietnam:
Vietnam & the UK
1. Financial Capacity.
2. Human Resources.
3. Intellectual Knowledge.
4. Time.
1. Financial Capacity.
2. Human Resources.
3. Intellectual Knowledge.
4. Time.
Summary
• There is no perfect measure of SI measurement.
– Organisations need to find the approach that works best for them and aligns with
their strategic aims.
• The ‘Social Impact Matrix’ provides a route to mapping & measuring
social impact that is:
– Grounded in prior research & theory.
– Allows for a tailored approach to individual organisations.
– Is not purely fiscally based (i.e. like SROI).
• This type of measurement is considered best practice by the EC (EC
Social Impact Sub-group, Feb 2014).
• Newton Fund output 2016: Publication of the SIM framework for
Vietnam will be made available on the CEDS website for
Vietnamese social enterprises to engage with.
Thank you
for listening
Any questions?
Dr Richard Hazenberg
Email: [email protected]
Tel: +44 (0)7803924987