Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Are foundations assessing their impact? Concepts, methods and barriers to social impact assessment in Italian foundations

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Social Impact Assessment (SIA) is a mantra for nonprofit studies in recent years and for foundations in particular which are considered to be well-positioned to measure the impact of their grants. This paper aims to explore what foundations mean with impact, the ways they measure it and the barriers in performing evaluations. Its mixed method approach includes an extensive documentary analysis of 196 foundations, complemented by 10 in-depth interviews with informants of 13 foundations which use different methods of evaluation. From our analysis, the degree of foundations’ disclosure on SIA is low, and no common meaning of social impact exists. Foundations prefer qualitative methods for data collection rather than quantitative ones. The reasons behind SIA are primarily based on internal considerations concerning foundations’ legitimacy, and the lack of professional staff is a major barrier. The findings challenge foundations’ accountability and knowledge sharing, fundamental to fostering peer dialogue and increasing participatory evaluations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The sample is formed by the total number of Assifero and ACRI members as at 15th of September 2015. Assifero is the Italian Association of Foundations and Philanthropic Organizations and includes corporate, community, family and endowed foundations. ACRI is the Association of Italian Foundations of Banking Origin and Saving Banks and it represents all foundations of banking origin across the country.

References

  • Anheier, H.K. & Leat, D., (2006). Creative philanthropy: Toward a new philanthropy for the twenty-first century. Routledge.

  • Anheier, H., & Leat, D. (2013). Philanthropic foundations: What rationales? Social Research, 80(2), 449–472.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arvidson, M., Lyon, F., McKay, S., & Moro, D. (2013). Valuing the social? The nature and controversies of measuring social return on investment (SROI). Voluntary Sector Review, 4, 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1332/204080513X661554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagnoli, L., & Megali, C. (2009). Measuring performance in social enterprises. Non Profit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(1), 149–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barbetta, G. (2012). Le fondazioni - in Gori, C. (ed.), L’alternativa al pubblico? Le forme organizzate di finanziamento privato nel welfare sociale. Milano: Franco Angeli.

  • Barman, E. (2007). What is the bottom line for nonprofit organizations? A history of measurement in the British voluntary sector. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 18(2), 101–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barraket, J., & Yousefpour, N. (2013). Evaluation and social impact measurement amongst small to medium social enterprises: Process. Purpose and Value. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 72(4), 447–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J., & Lee, M. (2014). Advancing research on hybrid organizing—Insights from the study of social enterprises. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 397–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernard, H., & Ryan, G. W. (1998). Text analysis: Qualitative and quantitative methods. In H. R. Bernard (Ed.), Handbook of methods in cultural anthropology. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boris, E. T., & Kopczynski Winkler, M. (2013). The emergence of performance measurement as a complement to evaluation among U.S. foundations. New Directions for Evaluation, 2013(137), 69–80.

  • Brest, P., & Harvey, H. (2008). Money well spent: A strategic plan for smart philanthropy. New York: Bloomberg Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Methods – 2nd edition, Oxford University Press.

  • Buckingham, H. (2009). Competition and contracts in the voluntary sector: Exploring the implications for homelessness service providers in Southampton. Policy & Politics, 37, 235–254. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557309X441045.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. (2004). Qualitative Interviewing – in Seale, C. (ed.), Researching Society and Culture. SAGE Publications Inc.

  • Castles, F. G., Leibfried, S., Lewis, J., Obinger, H., & Pierson, C. (2010). The Oxford handbook of the welfare state. In Oxford University press, Oxford. New: York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C., Rosenzweig, W., Long, D., & Olsen, S. (2004). Double Bottom Line Project Report: Assessing Social Impact in Double Bottom Line Ventures. Rockefeller Foundation. In Duke University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crutchfield, L. R., & Grant, H. M. (2008). Forces for good: The six practices of high-impact nonprofits. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • David, M., & Sutton, C. D. (2011). Social research - an introduction. SAGE Publications Inc..

  • Decreto Legge 6 giugno 2016, n. 106. Delega al Governo per la riforma del Terzo settore, dell'impresa sociale e per la disciplina del servizio civile universale. (GU n.141 del 18-6-2016).

  • Dey, C., & Gibbon, J. (2017). Moving on from scaling up: Further Progress in developing social impact measurement in the third sector. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, 37, 66–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2017.1285712.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahim, A., & Rangan, V. K. (2014). What impact? A framework for measuring the scale and scope of social performance. California Management Review, 56(3), 118–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, D., & Klerman, J. A. (2012). When is a program ready for rigorous impact evaluation? The role of a falsifiable logic model. Evaluation Review, 36(5), 375–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2011). Social Business Initiative - Creating a favourable climate for social enterprises, key stakeholders in the social economy and innovation, {SEC(2011) 1278 final}. Brussels, 25.10.2011 COM(2011) 682 final.

  • European Commission (2012). Design and commissioning of counterfactual impact evaluations. A practical guidance for ESF managing authorities.

  • Fleishman (2007). The Foundation: A great American secret; how private wealth is changing the world. Public affairs.

  • Flynn, P., & Hodgkinson, V. A. (Eds.). (2001). Measuring the impact of the nonprofit sector. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grieco, C., Michelini, L., & Iasevoli, G. (2015). Measuring value creation in social enterprises: A cluster analysis of social impact assessment models. Nonprofit & Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 44(6), 1173–1193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guest, G., MacQueen, K. M., & Namey, E. E. (2012). Applied thematic analysis. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hackler, D., & Saxton, G. D. (2007). The strategic use of information technology by nonprofit organizations: Increasing capacity and untapped potential. Public Administration Review, 67(3), 474–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, K., Miller, R., & Millar, R. (2016). Public, private or neither? Analysing the publicness of health care social enterprises. Public Management Review, 18, 539–557. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2015.1014398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harlock, J., (2013). Impact Measurement Practice in the UK Third Sector: a Review of Emerging Evidence (Working Paper No. 106). Third Sector Research Centre, Birmingham.

  • Harvey, W.S (2011). Methodological Approaches for Junior Researchers Interviewing Elites: A Multidisciplinary Perspective. Working Paper Series 01.09. University of British Columbia, Vancouver BC.

  • ISTAT (2013). Nono censimento dell’industria e servizi, istituzioni e non Profit Roma: ISTAT.

  • Jones, K. R., & Mucha, L. (2014). Sustainability assessment and reporting for nonprofit organizations: Accountability “for the public good”. Voluntas, 25, 1465–1482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-013-9399-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kroeger, A., & Weber, C. (2014). Developing a conceptual framework for comparing social value creation. Academy of Management Review, 39(4), 513–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leck, C., Upton, D., & Evans, N. (2016). Social return on investment: Valuing health outcomes or promoting economic values? Journal of Health Psychology, 21(7), 1481–1490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leeuw, F. &Vaessen, J. (2009). Impact evaluations and development: NoNIE guidance on impact evaluation.

  • Liket, K. C., & Mass, K. (2015). Nonprofit organizational effectiveness: Analysis of best practices. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 44(2), 268–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maier, F., Schober, C., Simsa, R., & Millner, R. (2015). SROI as a method for evaluation research: Understanding merits and limitations. Voluntas, 26, 1805–1830. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-014-9490-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maier, F., Meyer, M., & Steinbereithner, M. (2016). Nonprofit organizations becoming business-like: A systematic review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 45, 64–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764014561796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manetti, G., & Toccafondi, S. (2014). Defining the content of sustainability reports in nonprofit organizations: Do stakeholders really matter? Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 26, 35–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/10495142.2013.857498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millar, R., & Hall, K. (2013). Social return on investment (SROI) and performance measurement. Public Management Review, 15, 923–941. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2012.698857.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ní Ógáin, E., Lumley, T., Pritchard, D., (2012). MAKING AN IMPACT: Impact measurement among charities and social enterprises in the UK. New Philantropy Capital, London, UK.

  • Nicholls, A. (2009). “We do good things don’t we?”: Blended value accounting in social entrepreneurship. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(6–7), 755–769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noya, A. (2015). Social entrepreneurship - social impact measurement for social enterprises (OECD employment policy papers). Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oster, S.M., (1995). Strategic Management for Nonprofit Organizations: Theory and cases. Oxford University Press.

  • Phillips, N., Lawrence, T. B., & Hardy, C. (2004). Discourse and institutions. Academy of Management Review, 29(4), 635–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polonsky, M., & Grau, S. L. (2011). Assessing the social impact of charitable organizations—Four alternative approaches. International Journal Nonprofit Voluntary Sector Marketing, 16, 195–211. https://doi.org/10.1002/nvsm.407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polonsky, S. L. G., & McDonald, S. (2016). Perspectives on social impact measurement and non-profit organisations. Marketing Intelligence & Plan, 34, 80–98. https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-11-2014-0221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reich, R. (2013). What are foundations for? A Panel Debate on Philanthropy and Democracy. Conference Debate. ASH Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation, Harvard Kennedy School, (April 23, 2013).

  • Rey-Garcia, M., Liket, K., Alvarez-Gonzalez, L. I., & Maas, K. (2017). Back to basics. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 27, 493–511. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ricciuti, E., & Turrini, A. (2018). Foundations in Italy: What roles and challenges? American Behavioral Scientist., 62, 1822–1832. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218773435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saldaña, J., (2016). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. SAGE Publications, Los Angeles; London.

  • Saxton, G. D., & Guo, C. (2011). Accountability online: Understanding the web-based accountability practices of nonprofit organizations. Non Profit & Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(2), 270–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuyt, T. N. M. (2017). Philanthropy and the philanthropy sector: An introduction. Routledge.

  • SROI Network (2012). A guide to social return on investment.

  • Stemler, S. (2001). An overview of content analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(17).

  • Trelstad, B. (2014). The elusive quest for impact: The evolving practice of social-impact measurement. In L. Salamon (Ed.), New frontiers of philanthropy. Oxford University Press.

  • Wainwright, S. (2002). Measuring impact: A guide to resources. National Council for voluntary Organisations. London: UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitman, J. R. (2008). Evaluating philanthropic foundations according to their social values. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 18, 417–434. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Worth, M.J. (2014). Nonprofit management: principles and practices. Third edition - SAGE Publications.

  • Yin, R. (2009). Case study research - design and methods. SAGE Publications Inc.

  • Zadek, S. & Radovich, S. (2006). Governing Collaborative Governance: Enhancing Development Outcomes by Improving Partnership Governance and Accountability. AccountAbility and the corporate social responsibility initiative, working paper no. 23. Cambridge, MA: John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Research on Health and Social Care Management (CERGAS), SDA Bocconi School of Management, Bocconi University, Via Guglielmo Roentgen, 1, 20136, Milan, Italy

    Elisa Ricciuti

  2. Yunus Centre for Social Business and Health, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, G4 0BA, UK

    Francesca Calò

Authors
  1. Elisa Ricciuti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francesca Calò
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elisa Ricciuti.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ricciuti, E., Calò, F. Are foundations assessing their impact? Concepts, methods and barriers to social impact assessment in Italian foundations. Int Rev Public Nonprofit Mark 15, 553–574 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12208-018-0213-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12208-018-0213-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation