Monitoring Philanthropic Outcomes

Impact measurement is increasingly used by organisations and investors to understand whether their activities create meaningful change. This guide explains how to plan, implement and manage impact measurement in practice, combining methodological steps with real examples to support consistent and credible application. The material presents the following essential aspects: – Definition of clear objectives to guide the measurement process – Stakeholder analysis to capture expectations and interests – Data collection on outputs and outcomes to measure results – Verification and valuation of observed impact – Monitoring and reporting systems to track progress and communicate findings – Role of impact management in linking measurement with organisational learning – Case studies from venture philanthropy and social investment showing applications and challenges The content underlines that measuring impact is only valuable when results are embedded into management and decision-making. By following structured steps, engaging stakeholders and using tools such as theory of change, organisations can generate evidence that not only demonstrates accountability but also improves performance and maximises social value.

If you're working in peacebuilding, gender equality, or humanitarian response — particularly as a civil society organization — this Monitoring and Evaluation Manual by the Women’s Peace and Humanitarian Fund (WPHF) is a must-read. 🔹 What’s inside the manual? This comprehensive guide is tailored for WPHF grantees but relevant to anyone implementing M&E in fragile, conflict-affected, or humanitarian contexts. It covers: ✅ Foundations of M&E – Clear definitions of monitoring and evaluation, key principles (like Do No Harm, utilization-focused design, and participatory approaches), and the distinction between outputs, outcomes, and impact. ✅ Results Frameworks – Step-by-step guidance on building SMART indicators, setting baselines and targets, disaggregating data, and linking your activities to meaningful change. ✅ Quantitative & Qualitative Methods – Tips for choosing appropriate tools, developing surveys and scales, using mixed-methods, and ensuring ethical data collection. ✅ Feminist & Gender-Sensitive M&E – Practical advice on integrating intersectionality, co-designing tools with women and marginalized groups, and tracking shifts in power and agency. ✅ Sample Tools & Templates – Includes risk matrices, evaluation checklists, registration forms, training evaluations, and survey planning templates — ready to adapt for your projects. Whether you're a project manager, M&E lead, or program coordinator, this manual brings technical rigor and ethical clarity to your work. 📎 I've attached the full manual for further reading.

I spent the early part of my career in the nonprofit sector. Funders in particular often asked for impact data and related stories related to their philanthropic investments. Often they were met with hand-wavy stories, some decent testimonials and non-scientific estimates of impact. Today I spend my days working to scale nature markets where credits or related impact units are a key product. I have a sense that the 'credit' space (carbon, biodiversity, etc) could positively disrupt philanthropic giving. Why? 👉 Credits emerge often out of published and reviewed methodologies or protocols clearly documenting how impact will be made and measured. 👉 Credits can be backed by a mix of sophisticated and rudimentary monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) tools. 👉 Storytelling can be far more robust and authentic when backed by data emerging from agreed upon MRV protocols and agreed upon metrics for evaluating impact. Credits receive a fair amount of criticism (warranted at times), but at the end of the day, they can be finely tuned 'impact units' that offer philanthropists more illustrative ways of measuring ROI. Even better - methodologies for a desired impact can be iterated upon if you know your baseline data, a clearly defined methodology for change and quantitatively measured impact after a defined monitoring period. I assume philanthropy is monitoring the credit space? Any insights out there?