How do we define impact? Is it just a positive effect? Or is it something more concrete? Can it be proven? Can it be measured? Should it be measured?
There are two general dictionary definitions for “impact,” but in the social sector, we’re mostly talking about the second: to have a strong effect on someone or something.
We define positive impact as “turning the curve” (or beating the data baseline) on a community indicator of wellbeing or a program performance metric that answers “are our customers/clients actually better off as a result of our efforts?”
We all want to have a positive impact, but impact can go both ways. It’s unfortunate (but extremely important) to understand that our work may have a negative impact or no impact at all. This is why impact measurement is so important. It helps us clearly see the effects of our strategies so that we can reinforce what is working and change (or eliminate) what is not.
The 2 Types of Impact
When organizations talk about impact, they usually talk about how an individual program or service is creating community-level change. But this can be a misleading way to think about impact.
There are actually 2 different types of impact we need to think about. Understanding the distinction between the two is critical; not understanding the difference can be disastrous.
Program-level impact is the impact that individual services have on the people who directly participate in them.
Population-level (or community-level) impact is the impact that many different partners, working in collaboration, have on a specific population (community, town, state. etc.)
The reason we separate these types of impact is that:
Individual organizations and agencies cannot and should not be held solely responsible for creating population-level impact. Community wellbeing is complex and relies on factors involving a wide range of groups, individuals, agencies, organizations, and industries. Individuals and organizations can only be held responsible for the performance of the programs and services that they manage.
Answers & Comments
Answer:
What is Impact?
How do we define impact? Is it just a positive effect? Or is it something more concrete? Can it be proven? Can it be measured? Should it be measured?
There are two general dictionary definitions for “impact,” but in the social sector, we’re mostly talking about the second: to have a strong effect on someone or something.
We define positive impact as “turning the curve” (or beating the data baseline) on a community indicator of wellbeing or a program performance metric that answers “are our customers/clients actually better off as a result of our efforts?”
We all want to have a positive impact, but impact can go both ways. It’s unfortunate (but extremely important) to understand that our work may have a negative impact or no impact at all. This is why impact measurement is so important. It helps us clearly see the effects of our strategies so that we can reinforce what is working and change (or eliminate) what is not.
The 2 Types of Impact
When organizations talk about impact, they usually talk about how an individual program or service is creating community-level change. But this can be a misleading way to think about impact.
There are actually 2 different types of impact we need to think about. Understanding the distinction between the two is critical; not understanding the difference can be disastrous.
Program-level impact is the impact that individual services have on the people who directly participate in them.
Population-level (or community-level) impact is the impact that many different partners, working in collaboration, have on a specific population (community, town, state. etc.)
The reason we separate these types of impact is that:
Individual organizations and agencies cannot and should not be held solely responsible for creating population-level impact. Community wellbeing is complex and relies on factors involving a wide range of groups, individuals, agencies, organizations, and industries. Individuals and organizations can only be held responsible for the performance of the programs and services that they manage.
PA BRAINLIEST PO PLSS