Abstract

This study provides an analysis of the practical and theoretical differences in Social Impact Measurements (SIM) – as defined and is core to Impact Investing – and Programme Evaluation (PE) used in Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E). The study is the result of an inspiring effort to converge experiences of both Impact Investment practitioners and investment managers, with those of Programme Evaluators and M&E specialists. A meeting during the AEA’s (American Evaluation Association) ImpaCon conference in Atlanta in 2017. The effort was to facilitate co-learning in order to improve and grow the Impact Investing industry. The study analyses qualitative survey responses from a purposively selected panel of experts including: experienced SIM practitioners and scholars, impact investment managers, programme evaluators and evaluation scholars. Responses are deductively analysed to provide thematic reactions to the research questions. Even though there is a common theoretical intent to determine intervention worth in both SIM and PE, and a common adherence to principles of evaluative thinking; the study concludes that there are clear theoretical and practical differences in participatory and utilisation approach, efficiency and rigour.

摘要

本研究分析了社会影响衡量 (SIM) 的实际和理论差异 - 定义并且是影响投资的核心 - 以及用于监测和评估 (M&E) 的计划评估 (PE)。该研究是将影响力投资从业者和投资经理的经验与项目评估员和 M&E 专家的经验相融合的鼓舞人心的努力的结果。2017 年在亚特兰大举行的 AEA（美国评估协会）ImpaCon 会议期间的一次会议。该会议旨在促进共同学习，以改善和发展影响力投资行业。该研究分析了有目的地选择的专家小组的定性调查答复，其中包括：经验丰富的 SIM 从业者和学者、影响力投资经理、项目评估者和评估学者。对回答进行演绎分析，以提供对研究问题的主题反应。尽管在 SIM 和 PE 中确定干预价值有共同的理论意图，并且共同坚持评估思维的原则；该研究得出的结论是，在参与和利用方法、效率和严谨性方面存在明显的理论和实践差异。