eu webinar series | #2...gotowebinar | tips & tricks (2/2) 3 question time during q&a please...

With the financial support of the European Union

EVPA is kindly supported by:

EU Webinar Series | #2

– Impact Measurement : from Policy to Practice –

25 September 2014



GoToWebinar | Tips & Tricks (1/2)

2

Getting Started You are able to Open and Hide your Control Panel

Note: the control panel will collapse automatically when not in use by a participant. To keep it open participants can click the “View” menu and uncheck “Auto-hide Control Panel”.

To Join Audio:

Choose “Mic & Speakers” to use the VoIP. Choose “Telephone” to receive the PIN for the

webinar and dial using the information provided in the invitation.

Note: if you are using the telephone rather than VoIP, you must choose “Telephone” to receive the pin to access the audio.



GoToWebinar | Tips & Tricks (2/2)

3

Question Time During Q&A please raise your hand if you have a

question relating to the topic of the webinar.

We will unmute you and ask you to go ahead with the question.

If you have a technical issue while connected to

the Webinar please submit a text question or comment to the organisers using the Questions panel.

If you have technical issues accessing the Webinar please call Alessia Gianoncelli in the EVPA Brussels office on +32 (0)2 513 21 31.



4

IM Webinar | “From Policy to Practice”



5

IM Webinar | Welcome to Our Panelists (1/2)

Dr. Lisa Hehenberger Jim Clifford OBE Jan Lübbering Nalini Tarakeshwar

Florence Goudchaux Patrizia Bussi Elinor de Pret



6

IM Webinar | Welcome to Our Panelists (2/2)

Dr. Lisa Hehenberger

Research and Policy Director, EVPA; Member and Rapporteur of the Sub-group on Impact Measurement, GECES; Member of the G8 Impact Measurement Working Group and of the French Advisory Board

Jim Clifford OBE

Director, Bates Wells Braithwaite; Member of the G8 Impact Measurement Working Group and of the UK Advisory Board; Chair of GECES sub-group on Impact Measurement

Jan Lübbering

streetfootballworld

Nalini Tarakeswar

Executive Director, Evidence, Measurement and Evaluation at Children's Investment Fund Foundation (CIFF)

Florence Goudchaux

Social Investment Director, Phitrust

Patrizia Bussi

Coordinator at the European Network of Social Integration Enterprises; Member of the sub-group on Impact Measurement, GECES

Elinor de Pret

Public Affairs Manager, EVPA



7

IM Webinar | Programme

0. Elinor de Pret

Introduction to EVPA

1.1 Dr. Lisa Hehenberger

EVPA’s work in IM and the GECES Report

1.2 Jim Clifford OBE

The G8 Social Impact Investment Taskforce and the IM

Working Group Findings

1.3 Elinor de Pret

Overview of EESC’s IM Opinion (INT/721)

2.1 Jan Lübbering

Key Aspects of IM from the point of view of a Social

Entrepreneur

2.2 Nalini Tarakeshwar

Key Aspects of IM from the point of view of a Foundation

2.3 Florence Goudchaux

Key Aspects of IM from the point of view of an Impact

Investor

3.1 Patrizia Bussi

Conclusions

3.2 Q&A SESSION

1.

PO

LIC

Y

2.

PR

AC

TIC

E 3

. CC

L



EVPA is a membership association made up of organisations interested in or practicing venture philanthropy and social investment (VP/SI) across Europe. EVPA currently gathers over 170 members from 24 countries.

MISSION

• To be the natural home as well as the highest-value catalytic network of a growing number of VP/SIs.

OBJECTIVES

• EVPA is about increasing the effectiveness of VP/SI practitioners in Europe.

• EVPA is also about increasing the resources dedicated to VP/SI in Europe.

0. | An Introduction to EVPA

8

Our Community-Based Approach

by Elinor de Pret EVPA

mailto:[email protected]



0. | EVPA & the VP Spectrum

9

“Matching the Soul of Philanthropy with the Spirit of Investing”



0. | EVPA’s Activities

10

Networking Events

Training for Key skills

Research & Publications

Country Meetings

Building the Sector in Developing

Markets

Annual EVPA Conference

Workshops, Webinars & Site

Visits

Sector News & Public Relations

CONNECTING

Cooperation with other Networks &

Stakeholders

Best Practice & Guidelines

Market Data

Representation at EU & National

Level

Best Practice & Guidelines

Thematic Groups

Capturing Concerns of

Members

FACILITATING LEARNING

PROMOTING

BUILDING

INSPIRING



0. | Book now!

11



1.1 | EVPA and GECES

12

by Dr. Lisa Hehenberger EVPA; GECES; G8 Taskforce

EVPA’s Impact Measurement Initiative (IMI)

Report of the GECES Sub-group on Impact Measurement




EVPA IMI | Objectives

13

Provide VP organisations and other social investors with a hands-on manual on impact measurement in VP/social investment :

– An important tool to assist social investors in their daily activities

– Increase transparency and accountability of VP industry

– Neutral in terms of methodologies, databases, tools and metrics.

Establish a stakeholder group coordinated by EVPA to set standards in the VP and Social Investment industry:

– Reduce problem of multiple standards that increase work of both investor and investee

Impact measurement manual developed from April 2012 - April 2013 through interactive process including webinars, workshop and multi-stakeholder group consultation.



EVPA IMI | Expert Group

14

Expert Group made of 27 representatives from prominent organisations



15

Impact Measurement as a:

• Learning Process

• Management Tool

EVPA IMI | IM Process: Managing Impact

Source: EVPA

Full EVPA Impact Measurement Report available here: http://evpa.eu.com/publication/a-practical-guide-to-

measuring-and-managing-impact/

http://evpa.eu.com/publication/a-practical-guide-to-measuring-and-managing-impact/

















GECES IM Report

16

Follow-up to the Report produced by GECES Sub-group on Social Impact Measurement

Heraklion 10 June 2014

What is the GECES?

“Groupe d’Experts de la Commission sur

l’Entrepreneuriat Social”

• Informal consultative group set up for 6 years (2012-2017), which examines the progress of the measures envisaged in the Social Business Initiative

• 87 participants meeting twice a year

• Sub-group on Social Impact Measurement

• Adoption in Heraklion of a European standard to measure social impact



• Defining “Measurable Social Impact” for:

1. Programme for Employment and Social Innovation (EaSI)

2. The European Social Entrepreneurship Fund (EuSEF)

• Further step towards common communication of impacts

• To consolidate and work from collective experience

GECES Report | Background: the need

17



GECES Report | Timeline of Sub-group Work

18

Sub-group of 19 experts set up

Autumn 2012

6 physical meetings

Nov 2012 – Oct 2013

Progress report at GECES

June 2013

24 external experts consulted for feedback

Sept- Oct 2013

Report presented at GECES for feedback

Nov2013

Discussed in Strasbourg 2014

Feedback embodied in revised report

Approved by GECES June 2014



Standard should focus on:

• PROCESS – A common process of impact measurement designed to give account of intervention, its outcomes and how it achieves them. All Social Impact Measurement should be produced following this common process.

• CHARACTERISTICS – Common characteristics that define measurement disclosure (reporting) of acceptable quality.

Choice of frameworks and indicators is not to be mandatory (not included in standard) but a European-wide measurement framework (to be developed) is to be preferred status.

No single set of indicators can be devised top-down to measure social impact in all cases.

GECES Report | Key Findings (1/2)

19



GECES Report | Key Findings (2/2)

20

The Common Process Identify

objectives

Identify stakeholders

Set relevant measures

Measure, validate and

value

Report, learn and improve

1

2 5

3 4

Impact measurement: A learning process that involves key stakeholders every step of the way



GECES Report | Recommended Next Steps

21

Beyond finalising report with feedback from GECES, the sub-group has identified seven areas for further development:

1. Guidance papers to assist Social Enterprises, Funders, Fund Managers and Investors in complying with standards.

2. A knowledge centre - a permanently staffed facility which offers written guidance, a repository of impact reports, and an advice line.

3. Development and consolidation of measurement framework to form a preferred set for Europe-wide measurements.

4. Reporting formats should be developed around the standards proposed in this report.

5. EuSEF follow-up, in assisting Commission agencies, and others that require it, to embed Social Impact Measurement appropriately.

6. Expert group (sub-group continuation or otherwise) to assist with the Europe-wide roll-out of standards

7. An annual review of standard by such expert group is appropriate.



1.2 | G8 Taskforce

22

by Jim Clifford OBE Bates Wells Braithwaite; G8 Taskforce; GECES


www.bwbadvisory.com www.bwbimpact.com

EVPA Webinar on Impact Measurement: Policy and Practice

G8 Social Impact Investment Taskforce Social Impact Measurement Working Group

Jim Clifford OBE

Head of Impact and Advisory , Bates Wells Braithwaite

Co-chair, GECES sub-group on standards for Social Impact

Measurement

Member of UK Advisory Board, and of Social Impact

Measurement Working Group for the G8 Social Impact Investment

Taskforce

Jim Clifford OBE

Tel: 07860 386081

[email protected]

@bwbadvisory; @bwbimpact @Clifford_Jim

http://www.bwbadvisory.com/

http://www.bwbimpact.com/

September 2014

The Taskforce

24

Taskforce

Working Groups

Impact Measurement

Asset Allocation

Mission Alignment

International Development

National Advisory Boards

National Working Groups

22 Members from

7 nations and EU

Chaired by Sir Ronnie Cohen

29 Members from

7 nations and EU

Co-chaired by Luther

Ragin (GIIN) and

Tris Lumley (NPC) www.socialimpactinvestment.org

The full reports are available at

“It is urgent that governments throughout the world commit themselves to

developing an international framework capable of promoting a market of high

impact investments and thus to combating an economy which excludes and

discards “

Pope Francis June 2014

http://www.socialimpactinvestment.org/

September 2014

GECES Report as a key to uniting G7 thought

25

GECES

Common Definitions

• Impact

• Materiality

• Outcome

• Output

• Proportionality

• Reliability

• Stakeholder

• Theory of Change

Common Positioning

• No “one size fits all”

measurement solution

• Measure what is needed for

decision-making

• Set the measurement to

suit the goals

• Report the data fairly and

transparently, stating

assumptions

• Some commonality of

frameworks and indicators

can be achieved

September 2014

7 Guidelines: the key stages of Impact-based investment

1. Set Goals

2. Develop Framework & Metrics

3. Collect & Store Data

4. Validate

5. Analyse

6. Report Data

7. Make Data-driven Investment

Decisions

26

September 2014

Four “desires”

1. Embrace Impact

Accountability as a common

value

2. Apply best practice guidelines

3. Establish common language

and data infrastructure

4. Evolve – strive continuously to

improve

27



1.3 | EESC

28

European Economic and Social Committee

by Elinor de Pret EVPA Public Affairs Manager




• Consultative body of the EU (since 1958), with significant expertise in the field of social entrepreneurship.

• Actively engaged in the EU institutional agenda of social business; playing a key role during the ongoing institutional transition.

• Adopted an opinion on Social Impact Measurement in December 2013 (INT/721), with important safeguards to respect when it comes to standardising the impact measurement process.

• Safeguards:

– Complex topic which needs time;

– Incorrect / rushed approach may be counter-productive for the sector development; awareness-raising should have priority in the policy agenda;

– On-going process; integral part of an enterprise’s activity; strategic planning tool;

– Awareness building of the most commonly used IM principles;

– Close monitoring of any adopted standardisation process;

– Focus on stakeholders in the social economy and social enterprises.

1.3 | EESC’s IM Opinion - Overview

29



2.1 | Social Entrepreneur

30

by Jan Lübbering streetfootballworld


101 non-profit organisations 62 countries 1,192,000 young people empowered

Services provided to network members Expertise Awareness Funding Connections

The global network using football for social change

Impact Measurement www.impactinfocus.com

Team

Products and Services

a support package to assist organisations in impact measurement solutions - Web based software - On-site and online training

Policy debate on impact measurement Implications for social entrepreneurs (1/5)

• Best practices

• Needs

• Challenges

• Bottom up

General remarks

• Apply common sense throughout the process.

• Do not only follow standards step-by-step; keep some flexibility.

• Consider early-stage funding schemes.

• Provide contacts to (impact measurement) service providers for those social enterprises that still need to evolve.

• Change perspectives and put yourselves into the shoes of the social entrepreneur.


Impact practices by Mulago foundation

1. Is it needed? 8 words for mission statement

2. Does it work?

3. Will people use it as designed?

4. Will it get to those who need it most (at scale)?


• Be clear on due diligence and funding process.

• Use the impact data and material that the social enterprise has already got.

• Fund results. No hassle about indirect costs and overheads but about impact.

• If pilot is promising, commit multi-year funding.

• Dig deep. Ask the smart questions.

• Fund social entrepreneurs’ ideas, not those of funders, administrators or politicians.

(do not restrict call for proposals too much)

• Give qualitative feedback.

• Connect social entrepreneurs to other funding opportunities.


GECES notes for standards in impact measurement

1. Substantial variety of social impact;

2. No use of quantitative indicators only;

3. Precise evaluation at odds with proportionality;

4. Trade-off between comparability of activities and management of social enterprise;

5. Impact measurement evolving rapidly, no standard over years.




2.2 | Foundation

38

by Nalini Tarakeshwar Children's Investment Fund Foundation


ciff.org

IMPACT MEASUREMENT: A FOUNDATION’S PERSPECTIVE

Nalini Tarakeshwar, Executive Director

Evidence, Measurement and Evaluation

About CIFF

Mission: CIFF aims to demonstrably improve the lives of children in developing countries by

achieving large-scale, sustainable impact

Urbanisation

Education Nutrition Climate Change

Energy transformation

HFCs

School-based Deworming

Pre-primary Education

Stunting and wasting

Strategic

Priority Areas

(SPA)

Land Use

Evidence,

Measurement,

Evaluation

Strategy and

Partnerships

Finance and

Operations

Health

Perinatal mortality

PMTCT

Adolescent Reproductive Health

SECTORS

BUSINESS

SUPPORT

Impact measurement needs to be embedded throughout the investment

lifecycle

Before

investing

During

implementation

End of

investment

SPA Strategy

development

and rollout

Conduct SPA- level

Evidence Review

Design Strategy

Measurement and

Evaluation framework

Conduct Evidence Review

(specific to investment)

Develop Theory of Change

Design Evaluation

approach: audience,

questions and timelines

Plan for Monitoring

Assess Cost-effectiveness

(CE)

Manage evaluation

Review and respond to

monitoring data and

evaluation findings

Update evidence

Validate CE assumptions

Disseminate findings

Inform future investment

selection and strategy

evaluation

Impact can be manifested at multiple levels

Organi- sational

(e.g., Increase domestic financing for child health)

Sector/ Strategic Priority Area (SPA)

(e.g., Deworming treatment becomes routine for school age children until worms are no longer a public health

problem)

Investment level

(e.g., Reduce neonatal mortality within government hospitals through introduction of safe childbirth checklists

for health workers)

• Purpose: Assess impact of investment

• How: Fit for purpose approach (e.g., RCTs, quasi

experimental approaches); attribution plausible

• When: Quarterly monitoring data, impact at 2-3 years

• Purpose: Track SPA level progress, evaluate collective impact

of investments, review theory of change

• How: Quantitative/ qualitative methodologies; attribution difficult;

aggregating investment impacts murky – useful to track common

set of metrics across investments

• When: Every 3 years or so

• Build partnerships to enhance data access and quality

• Purpose: Track progress against org priorities; review theory of change

• How: Quantitative/ qualitative methodologies; attribution not meaningful

• When: Every 3 years or so

If we are achieving success in many of our investments but SPA goals show little change, then the Theory of Change needs

course correction or we may need to re-examine context/ evidence

In summary, we have learned that it is important to..

• Articulate vision for success and how we will know we have achieved it

• Be explicit about the theory of change for achieving success

• Pursue investments that link with the strategy, while continuing to examine evidence

that may compel us to consider strategic shifts

• Embed impact measurement throughout an investment life cycle and across all three

levels of impact

• Keep track of evidence/ context to periodically interrogate the theory of change at the

SPA and organisational levels, acknowledging that impact may be more visible and

realised sooner at the investment level

What we are working on..

Creating an environment for continuous improvement

Sharing our experiences

Learning from others

“When my information changes, I alter my conclusions. What do you do, sir?” John

Maynard Keynes.



2.3 | Impact Investing Fund

45

by Florence Goudchaux Phitrust


Social Impact Investing - Investments that make sense

ESG Impact Measurement Strategy

Overview of PhiTrust’s Investment Proposal

47

Add social and economic value to the communities in which we work

Contribute to addressing persistent challenges and supporting social innovation

Assist social enterprises in becoming economically viable and in obtaining a long-term positive financial return for all stakeholders

Objectives of PhiTrust’s Social Investment Strategy

Since 2005, PhiTrust Partenaires has provided financial and non-financial support to projects that are economically viable today, or in the near future, and that generate significant and measurable social and / or environmental impact

An Investment Strategy Focused on ‘Impact First’

5

PhiTrust Partenaires, a socially-oriented investment company,

falls within the sector of « impact investing »,

and more specifically within the category of « impact first »,

with a social performance objective limited by financial constraints

49

What is a « Social Enterprise »?

A non-listed company

- Profitable

- Financially sustainable

Measurable objectives:

- Social

- Environmental

49

Who is an « Impact Investor » ?

5

An impact fund must give to its shareholders informations on both :

Impact return

Financial return

IMPACT RETURN MUST BE MEASURED AND VALIDATED

Looking to create a real impact with its money, whether it be a social or an

environmental impact, while back with a financial

Some want to be “active investor” and guide and support the enterprise

development = give a support which is both financial and human.

We focus on investment opportunities that have proved their social impact

With each enterprise before investment :

We identifiy measurable ESG objectives

We set a list of relevant quantitative criteria to achieve this objectives

To the due diligence

We validate an ESG risk level

51


Before Investment

IDENTIFICATION

52

Annually we collect informations to each investment at both levels :

A quantitative one through the follow up on criteria decided with the entrepreneur

A qualitative one through a questionnaire about the ESG criteria and the advice of our committee investment member who supports the enterprise

1 - REPORTING

Throughout Investment



53

Results are analysed at two levels :

Investment

Portfolio

2 - ANALYSIS


54

Parallel evolution over time :

ESG performance against objectives

Financial performance by business

Precise analysis of ESG performance relative to the assessed risk , over time

Evolution over time of the progress of each criterion (listed with the entrepreneur)

2-1 | ANALYSIS per INVESTMENT



55

Impact results in relation to objectives, relative to the amounts invested

For each portfolio investment , monitoring social or environmental performance compared to the financial investment of PhiTrust

ESG performance of the portfolio against objectives ,

positioning annually the performance of each portfolio company in terms of Environment, Social and Governance

2-2 | PORTFOLIO ANALYSIS





3.1 | Conclusions

56

by Patrizia Bussi ENSIE; GECES




3.2 | Q&A Session

57

Dr. Lisa Hehenberger Jim Clifford OBE Jan Lübbering Nalini Tarakeshwar

Florence Goudchaux Patrizia Bussi Elinor de Pret



Elinor de Pret

Public Affairs Manager

[email protected]

58

Dr. Lisa Hehenberger

Research and Policy Director

[email protected]

Don’t hesitate to contact us, should you have any follow-up question related to this webinar and / or to EVPA’s activities!

Thank You !




eu webinar series | #2...gotowebinar | tips & tricks (2/2) 3 question time during q&a please...

Documents