140203 social impact benchmarking
18
CONFIDENTIA L This information is confidential and was prepared by Conjunct Consulting for trainingpurposes; it is not to be relied on by any 3 rd Party without our prior written consent. Social Impact Benchmarking
-
Upload
candice-chua -
Category
Business
-
view
103 -
download
1
description
• Why Measure Social Impact? - Social Impact tells the story of the change we bring to people’s lives - Measuring impact is the sign of a well-run ship - It helps tell your story to stakeholders - Impact is a valuable tool for ensuring more is done better, for the benefit of society.
Transcript of 140203 social impact benchmarking
CONFIDENTIAL
This information is confidential and was prepared by Conjunct Consulting for trainingpurposes; it is not to be relied on by any 3rd Party without our prior written consent.
Social Impact Benchmarking
CONFIDENTIAL
Agenda
2
1. Scale benchmarks
2. Quality benchmarks
CONFIDENTIAL
• Taproot Foundation
• New Sector Alliance
• Conjunct Consulting
Number of volunteer engagements completed
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
17 50 96 161 184 278 N/A N/A
3
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
60 97 99 92 107 132
12H1 12H2 13H1 13H2
5 7 12 11
Source: Conjunct Internal Data (2013), New Sector Alliance, “Social Impact Reports” (2013), Taproot Foundation, “Service Grant Scorecards” (2013)
CONFIDENTIAL
• Taproot Foundation
• New Sector Alliance
• Conjunct Consulting
Number of clients
4
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
44 65 60 66 85 86 94
12H1 12H2 13H1 13H2
5 7 12 11
Source: Conjunct Internal Data (2013), Michigan Ross School of Business, “The Taproot Foundation” (2008), New Sector Alliance, “Social Impact Reports” (2013), Taproot Foundation, “Service Grant Scorecards” (2013)
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
17 50 96 161 184 278 241 343
CONFIDENTIAL
Total hours donated
2006 2007 2008 2009
Not Available
5
• Taproot Foundation
• New Sector Alliance
• Conjunct Consulting
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
50,756 Not available
Not available
Not available
175,650
12H1 12H2 13H1 13H2
6,620 8,227 11,950 14,851
Source: Conjunct Internal Data (2013), New Sector Alliance, “Social Impact Reports” (2013), Taproot Foundation, “Service Grant Scorecards” (2013)
CONFIDENTIAL
• Taproot Foundation (estimated, US$)
• New Sector Alliance (US$)
• Conjunct Consulting (S$)
Value of pro bono service
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
695,000 1,925,000 3,880,000 6,625,000 7,660,000
6
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
1,970,000 N/A N/A N/A N/A
12H1 12H2 13H1 13H2
295,110 343,337 416,767 524,917
Source: Conjunct Internal Data (2013), Michigan Ross School of Business, “The Taproot Foundation” (2008), New Sector Alliance, “Social Impact Reports” (2013)
CONFIDENTIAL
Calculating the value of Pro Bono Work
• Pro bono work should be valued at Fair Market Value (FMV) and recorded as non-cash giving in CECP Survey Question 9.
• FMV is the hourly or project cost that a paying client would incur for the same service. Companies are encouraged to use the three scenarios below to assist in determining the FMV of services rendered. The dollar values in the scenarios below are based upon current U.S. salary data adjusted to account for geographic differences and typical fee-discounting practices.
7
EMPLOYEE SKILL AREA ENTRY LEVEL MID LEVEL EXECUTIVE
1) Marketing, Advertising, Public Relations $80 $100 $150
2) Accounting, Financial Services $90 $135 $200
3) Architecture, Engineering, Construction $75 $100 $145 4) Strategic Consulting, Organizational Design, Human Resources, IT Services $100 $150 $225
Rounded Averages for the Above Services $85 $120 $180
5) Legal, Medical Services $200 $250 $320
Source: Taproot Foundation, “Pro Bono Standards & Valuation” (2013)
CONFIDENTIAL
Hours donated by professionals
2006 2007 2008 2009
Not Available
8
• Taproot Foundation
• New Sector Alliance
• Conjunct Consulting
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
2,525 3,000 N/A N/A 2,600 2,868
12H1 12H2 13H1 13H2
3,547 3,925 4,076 5,437
Source: Conjunct Internal Data (2013), New Sector Alliance, “Social Impact Reports” (2013), Taproot Foundation, “Service Grant Scorecards” (2013)
CONFIDENTIAL
• Taproot Foundation
• New Sector Alliance
• Conjunct Consulting
Total number of volunteers
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
8 90 669 701 1489 N/A N/A N/A
9
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
218 259 219 200 218 N/A
12H1 12H2 13H1 13H2
71 90 127 138
Source: Conjunct Internal Data (2013), New Sector Alliance, “Social Impact Reports” (2013), Michigan Ross School of Business, “The Taproot Foundation” (2008)
CONFIDENTIAL
• Taproot Foundation
• New Sector Alliance
• Conjunct Consulting
Number of student volunteers
2006 2007 2008 2009
Not applicable – Taproot only uses professional volunteers
10
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
149 170 139 119 123 132
12H1 12H2 13H1 13H2
40 50 75 70
Source: Conjunct Internal Data (2013), New Sector Alliance, “Social Impact Reports” (2013), Michigan Ross School of Business, “The Taproot Foundation” (2008)
CONFIDENTIAL
• Taproot Foundation
• New Sector Alliance
• Conjunct Consulting
Number of professional volunteers
11
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
69 89 80 81 95 N/A
12H1 12H2 13H1 13H2
31 40 52 68
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
8 90 669 701 1489 N/A N/A N/A
Source: Conjunct Internal Data (2013), New Sector Alliance, “Social Impact Reports” (2013), Michigan Ross School of Business, “The Taproot Foundation” (2008)
CONFIDENTIAL
Agenda
12
1. Scale benchmarks
2. Quality benchmarks
CONFIDENTIAL
• Taproot Foundation
• New Sector Alliance
• Conjunct Consulting
% of clients who would recommend Taproot / New Sector Alliance / Conjunct to a colleague
2006 2007 2008 2009
97% 93% 94% 98%
13
2008 2009 2010 2011
100% 95% Not available 95%
12H1 12H2 13H1 13H2
100% 100% 100% 100%
Source: Conjunct Internal Data (2013), New Sector Alliance, “Social Impact Reports” (2013), Taproot Foundation, “Service Grant Scorecards” (2013)
CONFIDENTIAL
• Taproot Foundation
• New Sector Alliance
• Conjunct Consulting
% of clients who agreed that Taproot / NSA / Conjunct had a measurable / significantly positive impact on their organization & beneficiaries
2006 2007 2008 2009
Not available 93% 93% 96%
14
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Not available
Not available
Not available
99% 97%
12H1 12H2 13H1 13H2
100% 100% 100% 100%
Source: Conjunct Internal Data (2013), New Sector Alliance, “Social Impact Reports” (2013), Taproot Foundation, “Service Grant Scorecards” (2013)
CONFIDENTIAL
% of professional volunteers who said they were more likely to take an active role in the social sector as a direct result of their experience
2006 2007 2008 2009
Not Available
15
• Taproot Foundation
• New Sector Alliance
• Conjunct Consulting
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
100% 92% 85% 85% 90%
12H1 12H2 13H1 13H2
Not Available
Source: Conjunct Internal Data (2013), New Sector Alliance, “Social Impact Reports” (2013), Taproot Foundation, “Service Grant Scorecards” (2013)
CONFIDENTIAL
• Taproot Foundation (% satisfied)
• New Sector Alliance (median)
• Conjunct Consulting
% of clients satisfied with final deliverable
2006 2007 2008 2009
95% 92% 92% 96%
16
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Not available
12H1 12H2 13H1 13H2
100% 100% 100% 100%
Source: Conjunct Internal Data (2013), New Sector Alliance, “Social Impact Reports” (2013), Taproot Foundation, “Service Grant Scorecards” (2013)
CONFIDENTIAL
• 98% of 2007 student participants and 91% of consultant mentors and coaches believe that New Sector has increased the effectiveness with which they can contribute to the social sector.
• 89% of NSA alumni report that the NSA experience has directly contributed to success in their professional career
• “On a scale of 1 to 10, how transferable are the new skills and experiences gained through the New Sector program to your future career?”(1 = not transferable, 10 = extremely transferable) 2008 average response: 9.1
• 2009: 96% of Residents and Summer Fellows say that their experience with New Sector Alliance will increase the effectiveness of their future contributions to the social sector.
Other benchmarks
17
CONFIDENTIAL
Sources
• Michigan Ross School of Business, “The Taproot Foundation” (2008)• New Sector Alliance, “Social Impact Reports” (2012), Retrieved on 3 Feb
2014 from http://www.newsector.org/content/social-impact-reports • Taproot Foundation, “Pro Bono Standards & Valuation” (2013), Retrieved on
3 Feb 2014 from http://www.taprootfoundation.org/do-probono/pro-bono-standards-valuation
• Taproot Foundation, “Service Grant Scorecards” (2013), Retrieved on 3 Feb 2014 from http://www.taprootfoundation.org/about-probono/about-taproot/governance/service-grant-scorecards
18Source: Taproot Foundation Pro Bono Standards & Valuation (2013)
