Provisional translation

Promoting Social Impact Measurement– Basic Concept of Social Impact Measurement for Solving Social Issues and Plans to be Taken –March 2016
Working Group on Social Impact Measurement-1-

Provisional translation

Contents
1. Reasons Why Social Impact Measurement is Required ........................................... 5
2. Meaning of Social Impact Measurement .................................................................. 7
3. How to Practice Social Impact Measurement ......................................................... 14
4. Issues and Counter Plans for Disseminating Social Impact Measurement ............. 19
5. Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 24

Reference materials and columns[Reference Material 1] List of members ..............................................................................................................................................
[Reference Material 2] Meetings of the Social Impact Measurement WG ..........................................................................................
[Reference Material 3] Advantages of social impact measurement indicated in other countries’ guidelines.......................................
[Reference Material 4] Supplementary guidance on materiality .......................................................................................... (omitted)[Reference Material 5] Basic examples of measurement methods ....................................................................................... (omitted)[Reference Material 6] Measurement processes indicated in major guidelines publicized overseas ...................................................
[Reference Material 7] Items to be disclosed in social impact measurement reports ........................................................... (omitted)[Reference Material 8] Issues and obstructive factors in measuring outcomes and effects of businesses ...........................................
[Column 1] Definition of social impact measurement .......................................................................................................... (omitted)[Column 2] Impact measurement and social impact measurement....................................................................................... (omitted)[Column 3] Logic models and theory of change .................................................................................................................. (omitted)[Column 4] Initiatives for disseminating social impact measurement in the United Kingdom ............................................ (omitted)[Column 5] “Shared Measurement” ..................................................................................................................................... (omitted)

This Working Group aims to facilitate private investments for solving social issues undercircumstances where restrictions on public resources are intensifying due to population decline andfinancial constraints, for the purpose of promoting the further growth of entities (irrespective of theirsizes) engaging in businesses with the aim of creating social impact.
Therefore, the Working Group advanced discussions on required measurement, mainly focusing
on accountability obligations to stakeholders, which are the prerequisite for such entities when
procuring resources from outside, and compiled the basic concept of social impact measurement aswell as the issues and required measures for its dissemination.

-2-

Provisional translation

Summary of This Report
1. Reasons Why Social Impact Measurement is Required(International trends)○

After the financial crisis, funders have changed their attitude (to seek outcomes more than
before).

○It has come to be recognized that in order to utilize the private sector’s know-how in solvingsocial issues, the value created by businesses needs to be made visible.

(Current status in Japan)○

While the population is decreasing and aging, social issues are becoming more and morediverse and complicated. It is necessary to develop an environment in which all entities willing towork for solving issues are highly evaluated as new players in public-interest activities and canachieve growth by making the most of their know-how.

(Social impact measurement is the basis for enhancing the capacity to solve social issues)○

Through practicing measurement, entities will constantly review the content and method of
their businesses and activities and make improvements in their organizational management, which
will eventually lead to their growth. Furthermore, measurement will work to ensure betteraccountability, mobilize funds and human resources for public interest activities, and bring about
innovation that creates new techniques for solving social issues.

2. Meaning of Social Impact Measurement(Meaning of social impact and social impact measurement)○ Social impact:

Social and environmental outcomes resulting from the relevantbusinesses and activities, including short-term and long-term changes○ Social impact measurement:

Grasping social impact quantitatively and qualitatively andmaking a value judgment regarding the relevant businesses andactivities(Objectives, utilization, effects and significance of measurement)○

Measurement aims to extract value from businesses and activities, not to audit or appraisethem. Practicing measurement and utilizing the measurement results will have various advantages,
such as enabling entities to achieve growth and improve their businesses.

・Objectives of measurement: (i) to ensure accountability; (ii) to facilitate learning andimprovements
・Utilization of measurement: (i) for acquiring resources and achieving growth; (ii) for
managing business and making decisions
・Effects and significance of measurement
・ Entities will be able to make an appeal with the social value they have created.

-3-

Provisional translation

・ Entities will be able to further mobilize resources, such as human resources and money.
・ Measurement results may be used as grounds for explaining the effectiveness of invested
funds.
・ Measurement will lead to the generation of policy recommendations and institution-building.
・ Measurement will improve entities’ organizational management and operation.
・ Measurement will enhance entities’ businesses and activities.
・ Measurement will deepen communication between funders and recipients・ Measurement results will serve as reference materials when funders make judgments on
recipients’ organization, businesses and activities, and potential.
・ Measurement will enable funders to grasp the progress of recipients’ businesses andactivities as well as their business performance.
(Principles of measurement)○

Practicing measurement in line with certain rules while ensuring diversity in measurement
methods is important from the perspective of reliability and comparability of the measurement.

○

Examples of measurement principles: (i) Materiality; (ii) Proportionality; (iii)
Comparability; (iv) Stakeholder involvement; (v) Transparency(3) How to practice social impact measurement (measurement methods)(Scope of measurement)○

A consensus needs to be reached among related parties through consultations with regard to

the scope of targeted businesses and the outcomes to be measured, etc.
(Designing of measurement)○

Measurement should be designed by selecting methods based on the objectives andstakeholders’ needs for information as well as in consideration of resources available to each entitythat practices measurement (the principle of proportionality)○

Both quantitative data and qualitative data should be collected to the extent possible(currency conversion is not a requirement).

(Measurement process)○Measurement process consists of four steps: (i) making a measurement plan (Plan); (ii)collecting data and measuring (Do); (iii) collecting data and measuring (Assess); and (iv) reporting
and utilizing the assessment results (Report & Utilize)(Reporting and disclosure of measurement results)○

Information necessary for understanding relevant businesses and judging the reliability ofthe measurement results should be positively reported and disclosed.

(4) Issues and counter plans for disseminating social impact measurement<Issues>(i) Lack of understanding concerning the significance and necessity; (ii) Lack of understanding-4-

Provisional translation

concerning methods; (iii) Lack of tools; (iv) Insufficient basic information and shortage of referencematerials; (v) Shortage of human resources for practicing measurement; and (vi) Bearing of costs andideal forms of support<Required measures>○

Promptly establish a forum for promoting measurement, make an measurement

declaration, and prepare a roadmap for the coming ten years or so○(i)Seven significant works should be commenced within one year
Holding of a symposium aiming to disseminate social impact measurement and establishmentof a forum for promoting measurement(ii) Preparation of an measurement declaration and a roadmap by related parties(iii) Translation of measurement-related terms into Japanese and clarification of definitions(iv) Development of guidebooks on basic tools such as logic models and the theory of change inJapanese(v) Listing up of related foreign documents and translation of major ones into Japanese(vi) Holding of training sessions for fostering human resources and implementation of model
projects(vii) Sharing of knowledge by accumulating best practices and through peer review-5-Provisional translation

1. Reasons Why Social Impact Measurement is Required(1) International trends(Changes in funders’ attitude: seeking outcomes more)
The financial crisis in 2008 changed the attitude of funders, such as foundations and investors,
and they have come to seek outcomes more than before.
According to a questionnaire survey conducted in 2012 by New Philanthropy Capital (NPC), a
private research institute of the United Kingdom, the largest number of respondents cited “changes
in funders’ requirements” as the reason why they have become more positive about social impact
measurement.1
There is also a trend represented by the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) that companies place
more importance on their sociality as enterprise value and become willing to disclose non-financial
information in their business reports.
(Utilization of the private sector’s know-how)
As financial constraints in the public sector are intensifying and social issues are becoming more
and more complicated, there is a movement to seek solutions to issues by utilizing the private
sector’s know-how, while cooperative activities with NPOs and social impact investments are
rapidly expanding. As a prerequisite, the need to present the social value of businesses and activities
in a visible form has come to be widely recognized and social impact measurement is rapidly
spreading.
For example, in the United Kingdom, leaders in the field of social impact measurement gatheredin 2011 to actively discuss the current status and issues, as well as the future goals of social impact
measurement. As a result, the future goals and directions were shared and all-out efforts involving
both the public sector and the private sector have been made, leading to the current broad
recognition of the idea of social impact measurement.
(2) Current status in Japan(Need to mobilize resources of the private sector for solving social issues)
Japan now faces unprecedentedly rapid population decline and aging, while social issues are
becoming more and more diverse and complicated. There may be a limit to conventionalcountermeasures wherein the administration plays the central role.
Therefore, it is necessary to mobilize precious resources, such as human resources and funds,
retained in the private sector (resource mobilization) and develop an environment in which all
1 According to the survey by NPC, as reasons for having strengthened their efforts for social impact measurement in the past five
years, 51.8% of the respondents cited “funders’ requirements have changed,” 21.5% cited “the management has come to place morepriority on impact measurement,” and 8.7% cited “we have come to receive more support from funders thanks to measurement.”
Source: “Making an Impact” (New Philanthropy Capital (NPC))-6-

Provisional translation

entities willing to work for solving social issues are highly evaluated as new players in publicinterest activities and can achieve growth by making the most of their know-how.
For this purpose, it is necessary to establish a mechanism to first create a visualization of social
value created by such entities through their businesses and activities, verify such value, andencourage the entities to learn, and improve their organizations and activities, as well as fulfil theiraccountability obligations to funders. In other words, it is indispensable to have social impact
measurement accepted as the infrastructure for public-interest activities.
However, at present, social impact measurement is practiced by few organizations in Japan.2
Considering that it is important to clarify the necessity and significance of social impact
measurement and create momentum for its dissemination, this Working Group (the WG) compiled
the basis for positive discussions.
(3) Social impact measurement is the basis for enhancing the capacity to solve social issues
As explained later, social impact measurement aims to extract value, not to conduct an audit.
Discussions and verification of the logic model and the theory of change, which represent goals of
the businesses and activities, a roadmap to achieve them, causal relationships, etc., will have entities
constantly review the content and methods of their businesses and activities and improveorganizational operation, such as the allocation of human resources and funds and human resource
development, thereby enabling them to achieve growth as an organization. Furthermore, clarifyingsocial value created through businesses with the grounds therefor and ensuring the fulfilment ofaccountability obligations to funders will work to mobilize funds and encourage motivated humanresources with know-how to participate in public-interest activities, and will thereby bring about
innovation that creates new techniques for solving social issues.
In this manner, social impact measurement serves as the basis for enhancing the capacity to solve
social issues with the use of funds, know-how of the private sector. In Japan, which faces theaccelerating population decline and aging, the private sector is expected to take the initiative, incollaboration with the administration, in promoting the dissemination and acceptance of social
impact measurement at an early date.
◇ To all for profit and not for profit entities willing to solve social issues:⇒ Now is the time to practice measurement, fully utilize the results thereof to achieveorganizational growth and enhance capacity to solve issues.

◇ To funders and fund mediators, such as foundations, funds, community development
financial institution, , etc.:
2 In the United Kingdom, approximately 75% of organizations conduct impact measurement, while in Japan, only 33% responded
that they somewhat measure the impact of their businesses, even including those responding that they measure the impact of only
part of their business.
Source: “Making an Impact” (NPC); “Current Situation Survey on Social Impact Measurement” (Nippon Foundation)-7-

Provisional translation⇒ Now is the time to shift to prioritize social impact, clarify objectives and grounds for funding,and allocate funds to businesses and activities that generate outcomes and for the
implementation of social impact measurement.
◇ To intermediate support organizations:⇒ Now is the time to offer support to entities endeavoring to utilize measurement forstrengthening their power, and help them practice measurement, and at the same time tomake efforts to enhance your own capacity to support the implementation of social impact
measurement.
◇ To think tanks, researchers, and other experts:⇒ Now is the time to endeavor to build an intellectual foundation for the implementation ofsocial impact measurement and to bridge the gap between knowledge and practice.
These positive actions will bring about drastic changes in the flow of human resources and fundsof the private sector and will be a big help in solving social issues that are becoming increasingly
diverse and complicated.

2. Meaning of Social Impact Measurement(1) Meaning of social impact
Referring to practices in other countries and in consideration of the circumstances in Japan, theWG defines the scope of the social impact relatively broadly as follows.3
Social and environmental outcomes resulting from the relevant businesses and activities,
including short-term and long-term changes(Note) Outcome: Changes, benefits, learning and other effects brought about by output of an organization orbusiness
Output: Products and services, etc. created by activities of an organization or business[Column 1] Definition of social impact measurement (omitted)

3 Even in such countries as the United Kingdom and the United States, where social impact measurement is already conducted widely,
there is no unified definition at present. Various organizations and bodies define social impact measurement independently inaccordance with their purpose and backgrounds.

-8-

Provisional translation(2) Meaning of social impact measurement
The act of measuring social impact is defined as follows.
Grasping social impact quantitatively and qualitatively and making a value judgment
regarding the relevant businesses and activities
Key points here are as follows.
The first point is to make a value judgment regarding the relevant businesses and activities, inaddition to grasping social impact quantitatively and qualitatively.
The second point is to measure outcomes, such as changes and benefits,4 brought about by thebusinesses, etc. Therefore, measurement practiced only based on measurement of the output, whichshows the scale and scope of services and products, etc. provided by the businesses, etc., does not
fall under the category of social impact measurement.
Conventional measurement of non-profitable businesses often ended up only measuring theoutput, such as the number of participants in an event, but it is necessary to go so far as to measure
what changes have been brought about by the businesses.
[Column 2] Impact measurement and social impact measurement (omitted)(3) Objectives of practicing social impact measurement (objectives of measurement)
The designing of social impact measurement varies significantly depending on the objectives
and how to utilize the results. Therefore, it is important to clearly understand and be aware of theobjectives of practicing social impact measurement.
Roughly divided, the following two are cited as the objectives of social impact measurement.
(i) To ensure accountability
・Aim to disclose strategies and outcomes concerning social impact to external stakeholders(ii) To facilitate learning and improvements
・Aim to share strategies and outcomes concerning social impact within the organization,enhance understanding of the business and organization, and provide data for decision making,thereby improving the system of business operation and organization

4 Changes and benefits, etc. are expressed quantitatively and qualitatively and are sometimes converted to currency. However, such
expressions are selected depending on the objectives of the measurement and the needs of funders, etc. Therefore, currency
conversion is not a requirement.

-9-

Provisional translation(4) Parties who practice social impact measurement (parties involved in the measurement)
In many cases, business entities, fund mediators and funders, who need measurement for theabovementioned objectives, are supposed to practice social impact measurement. However,involving intermediate support organizations, and experts, such as consultants and researchers, aswell as stakeholders 5 including beneficiaries, and practicing social impact measurement incollaboration among all these parties is recommended. Experts are expected to play a significant
role in practicing measurement, not only by providing their expertise but also by facilitating
collaboration between business entities and funders, and further with beneficiaries.6
Measurement practiced by an entity by itself is internal measurement, whereas thatcommissioned to and practiced by an external expert, etc. from a third party perspective is externalmeasurement. Which to select is decided based on the objectives of the measurement.7

Entities conducting
measurement

Parties involved[Fig. 1] Parties involved in measurement and entities practicing measurement8

Business entities

For profit and not for profit entities (irrespective of their size) engaging
in business, such as incorporated NPOs, public interest incorporatedorganizations , stock companies

Fund mediators

Organizations collecting funds from multiple individuals and bodies toprovide financial aid, make investments and offer loans, such as funds,
venture capital companies, foundations, and financial institutions

Funders

Corporations (foundations and companies, etc.) and individuals(individual investors and donators, etc.) that provide funds to business
entities directly or via fund mediators

Experts

Intermediate support organizations, think tanks, researchers, etc.

(5) How to utilize social impact measurement (utilization, effects and significance ofmeasurement)
The term “measurement” may cause a negative image, such as that of being audited or appraised.
Furthermore, measurement, which requires the input of human resources and funds, may beconsidered to consume management resources.

5 Hereinafter, stakeholders include business entities, fund mediators, funders, experts, beneficiaries, related bodies, and citizens,
unless otherwise defined.
6 Beneficiaries of the businesses and activities and citizens may be broadly included in the parties involved in the measurement fromthe perspective of providing data and reflecting their opinions in improving the businesses.
7 Generally, internal measurement is suitable when aiming to facilitate learning and improvements, while external measurement issuitable when aiming to ensure accountability. However, which to select should be decided also in consideration of the stakeholders’needs and resources available to each entity that conducts measurement.
8 Here, foundations as fund mediators are organizations that provide aid and loans as an agent, such as a community foundation thatcollects funds from many and unspecified individuals and companies, while foundations as funders are organizations that provide
aid and loans on their own free will, such as a financial group that manages funds contributed by a specific company, etc.

- 10 -

Provisional translation

However, measurement aims to extract value, and practicing social impact measurement andutilizing the measurement results will have various advantages, such as enabling entities to achieve
growth and improve their businesses. Those fully utilizing measurement include not only the parties
involved in the measurement but also experts who promote collaborative actions and citizens whomake decisions concerning donations or volunteer activities based on the measurement results. The
administration also needs to take into account the relevant measurement results when offeringsubsidies and grants.
(i) For acquiring resources and achieving growth・Disclose to existing or potential funders the entity’s strategies for creating social impact throughits businesses and activities as well as the outcomes, thereby further attracting resources☑ Entities will be able to make an appeal with the social value they have created. (Business
entities)←A business entity that has lacked a means to present the excellent performance it has achieved canutilize social impact measurement to make an appeal.

☑ Entities will be able to further mobilize resources, such as human resources and funds.
(Business entities)←A business entity can deepen communication with funders by clarifying the social impact of its
businesses and causal relationships, grounds, and necessary resources for creating such impact, etc.
This will help funders better understand the businesses and activities of the entity, enabling the entity
to acquire more resources.

☑ Measurement results may be used as grounds for explaining the effectiveness of invested
funds to funders. (Fund mediators)←Social impact and grounds therefor are clarified and a fund mediator can make a clearer explanation
as to why it invested funds in the relevant entity and business.

☑ Measurement will lead to the generation of policy recommendations and institutionbuilding, not limited to proving the effectiveness of their own businesses and activities.
(Business entities)←

Measurement results and data obtained through measurement serve as grounds for theeffectiveness and necessity of the relevant policy.

[Opinions of a company conducting measurement]
Kamakura Investment Management Co., Ltd.
We have made investment in the FP Corporation that engages in recycling and manufacturing of food tray containers.
The company is characterized with its unique technologies and high rate of employees with disabilities, with some ofthem assuming major posts. We conducted social impact measurement for the FP Corporation in order to create avisualization of its efforts to hire people with disabilities and presented the measurement results at the general meeting of
our customers (beneficiaries). We also transmit our message as a shareholder of the company, requesting it to further
promote such activities.

- 11 -

Provisional translation(ii) For managing business and making decisions
・Fully utilize the measurement results in making decisions on the content of businesses andallocation of resources with the aim of maximizing the social impact☑ Measurement will make entities’ organizational management and operation betterment.
(Business entities)← Examination of businesses may trigger improvements in deployment and allocation of humanresources and funds, better understanding of weakness and efforts to overcome such weak points.

☑ Measurement will improve entities’ businesses and activities. (Business entities)←Examination of businesses and activities may encourage business entities to review the content thereof
or even change their goals, which may lead to a further development of the relevant businesses andactivities.

[Opinions of a company conducting measurement]
K2 International Co., Ltd.
We are offering support for self-reliance and job search to young people suffering from various problems. Our users
have difficulties in finding jobs due to their individual experience, family backgrounds, and attributes. When measuringsocial impact, we quantified levels of their difficulties based on their status and shared within the company the awarenessthat effective support programs differ depending on such levels of difficulties. Thanks to numerical grounds added to our
know-how, which has been accumulated based on personal experience of each counselor, it has become possible to offer
more concrete and effective support to each user.
We consider that social impact measurement facilitated our learning and has led to business improvements.

☑ Measurement will deepen communication between funders, recipients, beneficiaries, andrelated parties. (Business entities, fund mediators, and funders)←Through measurement, related parties can share goals and deepen their understanding of recipients’businesses, activities, and organizations, which will lead to the enhancement of mutual trust.

☑ Measurement results will serve as reference materials when funders make judgments on
recipients’ organization, businesses and activities, and potential. (Fund mediators and funders)←Logic models presented by business entities may be used as reference materials when fund mediatorsand funders make decisions concerning funding.

☑ Measurement will enable funders to grasp the progress of recipients’ businesses andactivities as well as their business performance. (Fund mediators and funders)←Practicing interim measurement at the intermediary stage of the business and activities, for example,
will clarify the progress and issues in achieving goals.
[Opinions of a company conducting measurement]
Social Investment Partners General incorporated association
We engage in venture philanthropy business using the Japan Venture Philanthropy Fund, which we operate jointly with
the Nippon Foundation. As part of our efforts for due diligence, we set KPIs for measuring social impact while using logic
models and other frameworks in establishing business plans together with support recipients. By making social impact
visible in this manner, the performance achieved by recipients is clarified, and at the same time, steps that recipientsshould aim at over a medium term become clear in the process of creating logic models and setting KPIs.

- 12 -

Provisional translation(for profit and not for profit entities)

Funders

Fund mediators

Business entities[Fig. 2] Objectives, utilization purposes, significance and effects of measurement by entity
Objectives

Utilization

Significance and effects

・To disclose strategies andoutcomes concerning social
impact to external stakeholders (toensure accountability)

・For acquiring resources throughdisclosing to existing or potential
external funders the entity’s
strategies for creating social impact
through its businesses and activities
as well as the outcomes (foracquiring resources and achieving
growth)・Enable the entity to make an appeal
with the social value they have created
・Enable the entity to further mobilize
resources
・Lead to the generation of policy
recommendations and institutionbuilding

・To share strategies and outcomes
concerning social impact within
the organization, enhance
understanding of the business andorganization, and provide data for
decision making (to facilitate
learning and improvements)

・For making decisions on the content
of businesses and allocation of
resources with the aim of
maximizing the social impact (formanaging business)

・Contribute to organizational
management and operation
・Lead to enhancement of businesses
and activities
・Deepen communication between
funders and recipients・To disclose strategies andoutcomes concerning social
impact to external stakeholders (toensure accountability)

・For acquiring resources throughdisclosing to existing or potential
external funders the mediator’s
strategies for creating social impact
through its businesses and activities
as well as the outcomes (foracquiring resources and achieving
growth)・Serve as grounds for explaining theeffectiveness of invested funds tofunders

・To share strategies and outcomes
concerning social impact within
the organization, enhance
understanding of the business andorganization, and provide data for
decision making (to facilitate
learning and improvements)

・For making decisions on the content
of businesses and allocation of
resources with the aim of
maximizing the social impact (formanaging business)

・Serve as reference materials when
making judgments on recipients’organization, businesses and activities,
and potential
・Enable the mediator to grasp the
progress of recipients’ businesses andactivities as well as their businessperformance

・To share strategies and outcomes
concerning social impact within
the organization, enhance
understanding of the business andorganization, and provide data for
decision making (to facilitate
learning and improvements)

・For making decisions on the content
of businesses and allocation of
resources with the aim of
maximizing the social impact (formaking decisions)・Serve as reference materials when
making judgments on recipients’organization, businesses and activities,
and potential
・Enable the funder to grasp the
progress of recipients’ businesses andactivities as well as their businessperformance[Reference Material 3] Advantages of social impact measurement indicated in other countries’ guidelines- 13 -

Provisional translation(6) Points to note when practicing social impact measurement(Principles of measurement)
Methods and content of social impact measurement vary depending on the field, the business of
the respective organization or body, the objective of the measurement, and the stakeholder’s need.
On the other hand, if each organization or body practices measurement in a completely different
manner, the reliability and comparability of each measurement will be lost and this will diminish
the significance and effects of social impact measurement as a whole.
Therefore, it is necessary to practice measurement in line with certain rules while ensuring
diversity in measurement methods. For example, the following principles are indicated in
guidelines publicized overseas,9 and it is preferable to implement measurement based on theseprinciples.

[Fig. 3] Major principles of measurement(i) Materiality

Measurement should cover information that helps stakeholders, such as employers
and employees, fund mediators, and funders, understand the relevant businesses andactivities and information on social impact that affects decisions on the provision offunds.

(ii) Proportionality

Measurement methods and methods of reporting and disclosing information should
be selected in accordance with the objectives of the measurement, size of theorganization that practices measurement, and available resources.

(iii) Comparability

Measurement results should be reported in a manner linked to past reports for thesame periods, targeted businesses and activities, and measurement methods in orderto ensure comparability.

(iv) Stakeholder
involvement

Stakeholders should broadly participate and offer cooperation in practicing social
impact measurement.

(v) Transparency

Grounds to prove that the analysis was made accurately in good faith should bepresented and reported to enable discussions thereon with stakeholders.

9 Referring to the following four guidelines: “BUILDING YOUR MEASUREMENT FRAMEWORK: NPC’s FOUR PILLAR
APPROACH” (NPC); “MEASURING IMPACT” (Social Impact Investment Taskforce (G8)); “A guide to Social Return on
Investment” (Cabinet Office (UK)); “Proposed Approaches to Social Impact Measurement in European Commission Legislationand in Practice Relating to: EuSEFs and the EaSI” (GECES Sub-group on Impact Measurement)- 14 -

Provisional translation[Reference] Other principles indicated in guidelines, etc.
○ Reliability○ Relevance○ Additionality○ Universality

Information should be accurate, correct and fair.
Measurement should be based on data collected and verified in a reliable manner.
All information required by stakeholders, such as business entities, fund mediators,
and funders, in making decisions should be included.
Data should be such that enables investors to judge whether the outcomes were createdwith the investment (whether they were impossible without the relevant investment).
Measurement methods (data collection methods) universally applicable to different
markets, regions, and sectors should be adopted.

3. How to Practice Social Impact Measurement (Measurement Methods)
Regarding how social impact measurement is carried out, the scope of the measurement,
measurement methods, and measurement processes are compiled as follows.
(1) What should be covered in the measurement (scope of measurement)(Prior consensus on the scope of the measurement is important)
Activities aiming to bring about changes in the society or the environment have diverse impacts
in the short term and in the long term, and it is difficult to grasp them all.
－ Outcomes of a health improvement business not only affect direct customers of the business (relatedparties) but also have a spillover effect on their families (decrease of the burdens of family members), local
communities they reside in (reduction in medical expenses), and other regions as well. Furthermore, theinfluence of other businesses may also affect such outcomes over time and it will become more difficult tograsp the whole picture.

When practicing social impact measurement, business entities, funders and mediators need toconsult to reach a consensus and clarify which business out of the entities’ all activities should bemeasured, and the scopes of the beneficiaries to be covered and the outcomes to be measured.
－

In some cases, the scope of outcomes to be measured is set completely apart from the relevant entities’
businesses and activities due to placing too much emphasis on their missions. However, it is significant toclarify the scope to be covered regarding to what extent the relevant businesses can bring about changes andto what extent the measurement should be practiceed.

(Information necessary for decision making should be included)
In light of the purpose and nature of businesses, objectives of the measurement and available
resources of organizations, measurement targets should include significant information required bystakeholders, such as business entities, fund mediators, and funders, in making decisions.
Additionally, based on the principle of transparency, specified scope of the measurement and thegrounds therefor must be clearly indicated upon reporting and disclosing information.
[Reference Material 4] Supplementary guidance on materiality (omitted)- 15 -

Provisional translation(2) What methods should be adopted to grasp social impact
There are various methods for grasping social impact, including quantitative methods andqualitative methods. The strictness of the obtained information varies by measurement method,while the required cost (human resources, time, expenses) also differs largely. Social impact isexpressed quantitatively and qualitatively, and is sometimes converted to currency. However, such
expressions are selected depending on the objectives of the measurement and the needs of funders,and currency conversion is not a requirement.
The methods for grasping social impact should be selected in accordance with the objectives ofthe measurement, needs of the stakeholders, such as fund mediators and funders, for information
brought about through social impact measurement, and resources available to each entity thatpractices measurement (the principle of proportionality).
It is also preferable to collect both quantitative data and qualitative data to the extent possible
and utilize them in analyzing causal relationships and social impact (“No numbers without stories; nostories without numbers” [Building Your Measurement Framework: NPC’s Four Pillar Approach (NPC)]).

(3) What procedures should be followed (measurement process)The process of the measurement roughly consists of four steps: (i) making a measurement plan
(Plan); (ii) collecting data and measuring (Do); (iii) collecting data and measuring (Assess); and(iv) reporting and utilizing the measurement results (Report & Utilize).
[Fig. 4] Measurement process

Report & Utilize
ReportDetermination ofassessment scope=Prior assessment of thetheoryScopes of businesses andstakeholders

Determination ofassessment
methods

Utilization for
decision making

Assessment ofproblems andobstructive factors

AssessPlan

Discussions andverification of the logic
model and the theory ofchangeCollection ofdata andmeasurement

Assessment of
causalrelationships

Do- 16 -

Methods of obtaining
indicators and data,
designing of assessment

Provisional translation

In order to practice social impact measurement effectively, it is preferable to check the logic
model and the theory of change from the stage of planning a business, while ensuringcommunication among stakeholders,10 instead of making an measurement plan after carrying out
the relevant business.11 By following such procedures, the outcomes aimed at and the means forachieving them can be shared among related parties, and necessary data and those serving as thestandard are made clear, which enables the follow-up of data even after carrying out the business.
Making a measurement plan (Plan)①(i)計画（Plan）
・ At the stage of making an measurement plan, the goals of the businesses and activities are
confirmed, the logic model and the theory of change are discussed and verified (priormeasurement of the theory), the scope of the measurement (targeted businesses andstakeholders) are specified, and measurement methods (methods of obtaining indicators anddata and grasping social impact) are determined.
・ Logic models and the theory of change are significant elements in social impact
measurement. These indicate available resources, planned activities, outcomes of the activities,
and changes as a result of the activities, and make visible the causal relationships of activities
up to achieving the goals. By clarifying these elements, a certain consensus can be reached inadvance regarding outcomes to be achieved through the business.
[Fig. 5] Example of a logic model
Outcomes
Activities

Input

・Planning

Example<Case of a businesspreventing adult diseases>

seminars
・Training
specialized staff

・Funds, facilities
・Specialized staff<Case of a business offering
employment support>

・Funds, facilities
・Specialized staff

・Planning
programs
・Training
specialized staff

Output・Number of seminars held
・Number of specialized
staff trained

・Number of participants
・Number of specialized
staff trained(Short term)(Long term)

・Increased citizens’

・Extended healthy life

awareness concerning
disease prevention
・Detection of diseases at an
early stage

・Increased labor force
・Decreased medical

・Enhanced self-esteem・Commencement of job
search activities
・Employment

expectancy

expenses・Career progression
through obtaining skills

・Decreased welfare
payments

・Increased tax income

Conventional scope of assessment[Column 3] Logic models and theory of change (omitted)

10 When creating a logic model, starting from a specific change to be achieved (impact), the required output and activities, andnecessary input are considered retrospectively.
11 If a measurement plan is made after carrying out the business, this may cause the selection of an indicator easy to achieve or thesetting of causal relationships as an afterthought, resulting in damaging the effectiveness of the measurement.

- 17 -

Provisional translation(ii) Collecting data and measuring (Do)・ At the stage of collecting data and measuring, with regard to the indicators specified inadvance, qualitative information is collected by utilizing such means as a questionnaire
survey,12 measurement, and interviews with beneficiaries.
・ In some cases, prior data are required for a comparison between before and after carryingout the business.
(iii) Collecting data and measuring (Assess)・ At the stage of collecting data and measuring, whether outcomes and relationships presumed
in the logic model have been actually created, and if not, relevant issues and obstructive factors
are assessed and analyzed based on measured quantitative data and qualitative information.13
・It is effective to combine qualitative assessment, instead of only counting on quantitative
assesement using statistical techniques.
[Reference Material 5] Major examples of assessment methods (omitted)(iv) Reporting and utilizing the measurement results (Report & Utilize)
・Measurement results are compiled into an impact report.
・ Measurement results are utilized for providing explanations to funders with regard to theoutcomes of the relevant businesses and investment, carrying out PR activities for attracting
funds for the future, reviewing and improving businesses and organizational management, as
well as when funders change their portfolios (allocation of resources) and grasp the progressof the relevant business (from the viewpoint of business management and decision making).
・ It is also important to modify businesses and activities through practicing interim
measurement and to flexibly review goals as needed.
[Reference Material 6] Measurement processes indicated in major guidelines publicized overseas

12 In order to prevent omissions, it is important to first clarify who collects what data on what occasion and in what manner, in lightof the objectives of the measurement and measurement methods, and then collect data and carry out measurement accordingly in aconsistent manner on an ongoing basis. In particular, when collecting data independently by way of conducting a questionnaire
survey, etc., instead of using publicly available data, certain procedures are required, and therefore, prior planning concerning
periods and targets, etc. is indispensable.
13 When outcomes were not created as had been expected, the analysis of relevant problems and obstructive factors is important tofacilitate learning and improvements. Qualitative methods such as interviews with stakeholders are also effective in such analysis.

- 18 -

Provisional translation(4) What information should be reported (reporting and disclosure of measurement)
Also with regard to the reporting of measurement results, following certain rules while ensuring
diversity is important from the viewpoint of reliability and comparability. The EU’s guidelines
specify “whether to comply with the basic standards or to explain why not (comply or explain)”14
as one of the basic reporting standards, in addition to materiality, reliability, and comparability (seeFig. 3 and the Reference).
Given these facts, it is preferable to positively report and disclose the following data necessary
for stakeholders, such as employers and employees, fund mediators, and funders, in understanding
relevant businesses and judging the reliability of the measurement results (in particular, in making
subjective judgment on the prerequisite and the materiality).

(i)Outline of the organization and businesses, related stakeholders, the logic model and thetheory of change(ii) Scopes of businesses to be measured, targeted stakeholders and outcomes, and the grounds
for specifying such scopes(iii) Measurement methods (measurement techniques, indicator for each outcome, and methodsof collecting data), and the grounds for selecting such methods(iv) Measurement results (including grounds for outcomes, analysis results of the outcomes, andlimitation of the analysis)(v) Utilization of measurement results in decision making

However, based on the principle of proportionality, it is essential as a prerequisite to consider
balance between the objectives of the measurement as well as needs of stakeholders such as fundmediators and funders, and the burden borne by reporters and disclosers.
[Reference Material 7] Items to be disclosed in social impact measurement reports (omitted)

14 Considering the principle of proportionality, it is impossible that all entities engaging in social businesses will acquire all material
information and make reports. In fact, required information and data may sometimes be unavailable or a rough estimation may bemade. Nevertheless, such limitations should be referred to and stated in reports.

- 19 -

Provisional translation

4. Issues and Counter Plans for Disseminating Social Impact Measurement(1) Issues
Discussions by the WG and prior hearings of members, etc. revealed various issues fordisseminating social impact measurement. The WG has sorted out issues and made them visible
together with required measures. The results are compiled as follows.
Issues are roughly categorized into the following six:(1) Lack of understanding concerning the significance and necessity of social impact
measurement on the part of related parties, such as business entities and funders(2) Lack of understanding concerning methods of social impact measurement(3) Lack of tools such as standard methods and indicators necessary for practicing social impact
measurement(4) Insufficient basic information and shortage of reference materials such as confusion in thedefinition of terms, which is the basis for developing measurement techniques, and shortage ofJapanese translations of foreign documents(5) Shortage of human resources for practicing measurement such as those who practicemeasurement and those who support the implementation of measurement(6) Bearing of costs and ideal forms of support[Reference Material 8] Issues and obstructive factors in evaluating outcomes and effects of businesses(comparison between Japan and the United Kingdom)(2) Required measures
The WG compiled the following as the measures to be taken by each party in order to cope withthe abovementioned issues and disseminate social impact measurement in Japan.
These measures should be taken in close collaboration among various parties involved in social
impact measurement, such as business entities, funders, fund mediators, researchers, think tanks,
and the administration, with the aim of disseminating social impact measurement consistently in aplanned manner.

- 20 -

Provisional translation

For this purpose, it is necessary for related parties to promptly establish a forum for promoting
measurement, make an measurement declaration, and clarify a roadmap for the disseminationof social impact measurement for the coming ten years or so.
[Reference]In the United Kingdom, the Impact Summit was held in 2011 with the participation of 30 leaders in the field ofsocial impact measurement and discussions were held for the dissemination and development of the idea of social
impact. After that, the Inspiring Impact Group was established by 12 organizations led by participants of the summit.
The group designated the period from 2012 to 2022 as the decade of high impact, and compiled the Route Map for
Changes (2012 to 2022) and the Action Plan for the Initial Fiscal Year (2012). Based on these, various projects fordisseminating social impact measurement have been carried out in cooperation. These examples are very helpful
for Japan in promoting social impact measurement.
[Column 4] Initiatives for disseminating social impact measurement in the United Kingdom (omitted)(i) Lack of understanding concerning the significance and necessity①「意義や必要性に対する理解の不足」○ Holding of a symposium aiming to disseminate social impact measurement
・ It is necessary to hold a symposium in collaboration among networks of NPOs and foundations,intermediate support organizations, and the administration, for the purpose of broadly publicizing thisreport and disseminating the necessity, basic content, significance and effects of social impact measurement.
[Networks of NPOs and foundations, intermediate support organizations, experts, and the administration]○ Establishment of a forum for promoting measurement by impact-oriented funders
・ It is necessary for foundations and other funders to change their awareness to be impact-oriented, positively
allocate funds to businesses and activities that create impact, provide resources required for the
implementation of measurement, and then request business entities to conduct measurement. [Fundmediators and funders]○ Request to sectorial associations of respective business fields
・ Social impact measurement should be disseminated via sectorial associations, which make adjustments andarrangements among organizations in respective business fields, to their affiliated bodies and organizations.
[Sectorial associations]○ Establishment of institutional incentives
・ It is necessary to create institutional incentives, such as prioritizing organizations that show outcomes andgrounds therefor in providing funds, thereby showing that social impact measurement is beneficial. [Fundmediators, funders, and the administration]
・ It is also necessary to create subsidized projects that enable support and measurement over multiple years.
[Fund mediators and funders]- 21 -

Provisional translation(ii) Lack of understanding concerning methods of social impact measurement②社会的インパクト評価の「手法に対する理解の不足」○ Holding of a symposium aiming to disseminate social impact measurement
Same as (i) above○ Sharing of knowledge by accumulating best practices and through peer review(*)*A mechanism for the evaluation and verification by peer researchers and experts in the same field・ At present, social impact measurement is practiced only by limited entities in Japan. Accumulating bestpractices and broadly sharing them will facilitate the dissemination of measurement know-how. [Business
entities, fund mediators, funders, and experts]○ Development of guidebooks on basic tools such as logic models and the theory of change
・ There are no guidebooks in the Japanese language explaining how to create logic models and the theoryof change, which are significant factors in social impact measurement, and this has been obstructing thedissemination of social impact measurement. [Experts](iii) Lack of tools such as standard methods and indicators necessary for conducting social
impact measurement○ Promotion of “Shared Measurement”
・ Initiatives to create social impact are diverse and it is not realistic to establish a unified method applicable
to all such initiatives. However, efforts should be made to develop common measurement tools to be usedamong multiple organizations, such as those for respective fields of employment support, child-rearing
support, education, and medical services. [Business entities, fund mediators, funders, intermediate
support organizations, and experts][Column 5] “Shared Measurement” (omitted)○ Compilation of indicators for respective fields
・ Preceding examples include the Impact Reporting and Investment Standards (IRIS) by the Global Impact
Investing Network (GIIN), the Tools and Resources for Assessing Social Impact (TRASI) by the
FOUNDATION CENTER, and the SOCIAL OUTCOMES MATRIX by the BIG SOCIETY CAPITAL.
[Business entities, intermediate support organizations, and experts]○ Opening of a dedicated portal site concerning social impact measurement[Intermediate support organizations and experts]- 22 -

Provisional translation(iv) Insufficient basic information and shortage of reference materials④「基礎的な情報の未整備、資料の不足」○ Translation of measurement-related terms into Japanese and clarification of definitions
・ Researchers should take the initiative and prepare a glossary as early as within 2016. [Experts]○ Listing up of related foreign documents and translation of major ones into Japanese[Experts]○ Establishment of an academic association specialized in social impact measurement[Experts]○ Promoting open data by the administration [The administration](v) Shortage of personnel for conducting measurement⑤「評価人材の不足」○ Holding of training sessions for fostering human resources and implementation of model
projects[Intermediate support organizations, experts, and the administration]○ Offering of support and consulting services
・ Think tanks and researchers should organize a team specialized in measurement to offer careful support
to those practicing measurement. [Experts]○ Preparation of assistance measures to strengthen intermediate support organizations’functions to help measurement
・ In order to strengthen functions of organizations in charge of mediating financing, efforts should be madefor each field and region to actually practice measurement and thereby develop capacity. [Fund mediators,
funders, and the administration](vi) Bearing of costs and ideal forms of support⑥「評価コストの負担や支援の在り方」○ Establishment of a mechanism for assisting the commencement of measurement[Fund mediators, funders, and the administration]○ Reduction of measurement costs through creation of common measurement tools andindicators as mentioned in (iii) above[Business entities, fund mediators, funders, intermediate support organizations, and experts]- 23 -

Provisional translation(3) Major measures to be commenced within one year
Out of the abovementioned measures, the WG picked up the following seven as major measures
to be commenced within one year. Related parties should cooperatively promote these immediately
in respective fields.

(i) Holding of a symposium aiming to disseminate social impact measurement
and establishment of a forum for promoting measuremente.g.) The Impact Summit held in December 2011 in the United Kingdom and the Inspiring
Impact established thereafter(ii) Preparation of an measurement declaration and a roadmap by related partiese.g.) The Evaluation Declaration 2006 by the Scotland Funders Forum and the Roadmap (2012to 2022) prepared by the Inspiring Impact(iii) Translation of measurement-related terms into Japanese and clarification ofdefinitions(iv) Development of guidebooks on basic tools such as logic models and the theoryof change in Japanese(v) Listing up of related foreign documents and translation of major ones into
Japanese(vi) Holding of workshops for
implementation of model projects

humanresource

developmentand(vii)Sharing of knowledge by accumulating best practices and through peer
review- 24 -

Provisional translation

5. Conclusion
This WG compiled the basic concept of social impact measurement for its dissemination,
together with issues and required measures, but this is only the first step for discussion.
From now on, the private sector, such as business entities, fund mediators, funders, intermediate
support organizations, and researchers, is expected to take the initiative in promoting efforts forsolving the abovementioned issues, in collaboration with the administration, and develop guidelines,
measurement methods, guidebooks, and indicators, etc. for social impact measurement suited tothe circumstances of Japan.
This is not an easy task, but we hope that 2016 will be commemorated as the first year of social
impact measurement with persistent efforts by related parties to make social impact measurement
the very basis of social activities in Japan, drastically changing the flow of the public sector’shuman resources and funds so that they are invested for the purpose of solving social issues.
It is our hope that this report will serve as a basis for such efforts.

It’s a Journey to Greater Impact!

- 25 -

Provisional translation[Reference Material 1] List of Members of the Social Impact Measurement WG[Members]◎ Ken Ito

Project Research Associate, Graduate School of Media andGovernance, Keio University

Katsuji Imata

Executive Director, Japan NPO Center

Takuya Okamoto

Executive Director, Social Venture Partners Tokyo

Sachiko Kishimoto

Executive Director and Secretary General, Public Resource
Foundation

Masaki KimuraCEO, Aichi Community Foundation
CEO, Community Youth Bank momo

Takeyuki Nakagawa

Team Leader, CSR & Environmental Affairs Department
Tohoku Recovery Team, Mitsubishi Corporation Disaster Relief
Foundation

Takashi Nagamitsu, Chief, Loan Planning and Public Relations Group, Business
Planning Department, Micro Business and Individual Unit,
Japan Finance Corporation

Hideaki Baba

Associate Professor, Faculty of Business and Commerce, Kansai
University

Eri Mizutani

Senior Analyst, Social Economy Research Center, Mitsubishi
UFJ Research and Consulting Co., Ltd.

Yuriko Minamoto

Professor, Graduate School of Governance Studies, Meiji
University◎: Chief[Advisors]
Yoshihiro Kamozaki

Secretary General, Japan Fundraising Association

Shigeru Fujita

SocialInvestment

Promotion

Headquarters, Nippon Foundation

Office,SocialInnovation

Provisional translation[Reference Material 2] Meetings of the Social Impact Measurement WG◆ 1st WG meeting (Dec. 21, 2015)○ Future directions of the WG
・ Sharing of expected outcomes of the WG
・ Sharing of themes and agenda for each meeting○ Current status of social impact measurement
・ Presentation by WG Chief, Mr. Ito (Backgrounds, etc. requiring impact measurement)
・ Presentation by Ms. Reiko Okada, Deputy Chief Researcher, Mitsubishi UFJ Research andConsulting (Current status of impact measurement)◆ 2nd WG meeting (Jan. 18, 2016)○ Agenda for the 2nd meeting・ Definition of social impact measurement; objectives, constituent factors and basic principles ofsocial impact measurement○ Discussions on issues and required measures concerning social impact measurement◆ 3rd WG meeting (Feb. 1, 2016)○ Agenda for the 3rd meeting・ Measurement methods (scope, designing, and processes); items to be reported and disclosed○ Report of cases
・ Mr. Kazuhiro Arai, Director and Asset Management Department Manager, Kamakura
Investment Management
・ Mr. Yoshi Tabuchi, Secretary General and Executive Director, Social Investment Partners
・ Mr. Takeshi Kato, Program Officer, Toyota Foundation
・ Mr. Takeyuki Nakagawa, Team Leader, CSR & Environmental Affairs Department Tohoku
Recovery Team, Mitsubishi Corporation Disaster Relief Foundation○ Discussions on issues and required measures concerning social impact measurement◆ 4th WG meeting (Feb. 29, 2016)○ Report of cases
・ Mr. Masaki Kimura, CEO, Aichi Community Foundation and Community Youth Bank momoProvisional translation

・ Ms. Mami Iwamoto, Total Coordinator, K2 International Japan, and Ms. Kana Kim,
Commissioned Trainer○ Report of an overseas survey (survey in the United Kingdom)
・ Ms. Eri Mizutani, Senior Analyst, Mitsubishi UFJ Research and Consulting○ Compilation of discussions of the WG○ Discussions on issues and required measures concerning social impact measurement◆ 5th WG meeting (Mar. 14, 2016)○ Report of an overseas survey (survey in the United States)
・ Ms. Eri Mizutani, Senior Analyst, and Mr. Naoyuki Ieko, Senior Analyst, Mitsubishi UFJ
Research and Consulting○ Compilation of the WG reportProvisional translation[Reference Material 3] Advantages of social impact measurement indicated in other countries’ guidelines
NPC

SROI

・Give a hint for achieving a mission

・ Promote discussions on management andincrease understanding of activities andsocial value

・Facilitate learning for improving
businesses

・ Help take optimal measures against
unexpected outcomes (irrespective ofwhether they are positive or negative)

・Lead to stable funding・Lead to acquire more funds

G8EU

・Enable calculation of the value for all
stakeholders

・Enable review of businesses
・Enable more effective utilization and allocation of
resources to create outcomes
・ Generate new benefits in the process of jointly
developing the idea

・Enable to attract more funds to increase
outcomes・ Serve as the basis for allocation of resources andjudgment on investments
・Help efforts made by inside and outside parties tocreate preferable outcomes
・Enable constant improvements of services and agreed
details, as well as mutual support between relatedparties・Enhance morale of employees and leadto operational improvements

・Enable to make an appeal externally・Contribute to the theorization ofbusinesses

・ Enable outside parties to understand proposedbusinesses and make decisions concerning support,
thereby enabling users to obtain the largest effect・ Help investors and funders extract more usefulknowledge and also help service providers develop
beneficial cooperation

・Enable to make an appeal externally・ Enable to present the significance ofbusinesses to organizations and individuals
who offer contributions
・Increase affinity among supporters

・ Help explanations on business plans andfacilitate well-ordered discussions withparticipating stakeholders
・ Contribute to creating shared awarenessbetween what the relevant entity wants to do
and what its stakeholders want to do

・ Enable to increase transparency andaccountability regarding outcomes

・ Enable inside parties, such as employees, to learn
about proposed businesses and share expected effects
・Help make an appeal both to potential partners andusers and enhance the morale of employees who
provide services and managerial personnel who areinterested in the value of their own duties

Source: “BUILDING YOUR MEASUREMENT FRAMEWORK: NPC’s FOUR PILLAR APPROACH” (NPC); “MEASURING IMPACT” (Social Impact Investment Taskforce (G8)); “A guide to Social
Return on Investment” (Cabinet Office (UK)); “Proposed Approaches to Social Impact Measurement in European Commission legislation and in practice relating to: EuSEFs and the EaSI” (GECES
Sub-group on Impact Measurement)

Provisional translation[Reference Material 6] Measurement processes indicated in major guidelines
publicized overseas
NPC
Plan

・Specification ofscopes・Creation of thelogic model・Setting of goals
・Determination ofassessment methods

EU

G8

SROI

Set goals

Set assessment scope andspecify major stakeholders

Create the theory ofchangeSet goals

Set priorities inmeasurement targets

Specify stakeholders

Select the level ofevidence

Determine proper
measurement methods

Set the framework ofmeasurement and selectindicators

Conduct measurement,
verification, andassessment

Collect and preserve data

Conduct outcome
mapping
Measure the outcomes andconvert them to currency

Select information
sources and tools

Do
Collection andverification of data

Verify data

Analyze data

AssessAnalysis of causal
relationships and net
outcomes

Report &Utilize
Reporting andutilization of resultsin decision making

Determine the impact

Calculate the SROI

Report the results, andlearn and make
improvements

Report the results

Make investments basedon data

Source: Extracted from the material prepared by WG Advisor Fujita (Nippon Foundation)

Prepare a report, andutilize and share the results

Provisional translation[Reference Material 8] Issues and obstructive factors in evaluating the outcomes andeffects of businesses (comparison between Japan and the United Kingdom) Various issues and obstructive factors in measuring the outcomes and effects of businesses are cited in Japan
as follows: “Do not have skills and expertise required for measurement” (77.0%); “Do not have sufficient
funds” (75.6%); “Do not know how to practice measurement” (73.5%); “Do not know how to analyze theresults” (71.6%); “Do not have human resources who can practice measurement” (70.9%).
 In the United Kingdom, the most frequent answer was “Do not have sufficient funds” (78.7%), followed by“Do not have skills and expertise required for measurement” (61.4%). However, percentages of the otheranswers were lower than those for Japan.

[Issues and obstructive factors in measuring the outcomes and effects of businesses]
0%

20%

40%

60%

Do not haveskills and expertise required for
評価に必要なスキルや専門性がない
measurement

80%
77.0%

61.4%

75.6%
78.7%
73.5%

十分な財源がない
Do not havesufficient funds
どのように評価してよいか分からない
Do not know
how to conduct measurement

52.9%

Do not know how to analyze the results
どのように結果を分析すればよいか分からない
Do not have personnel who can conduct
評価を実施できる職員がいない
measurement
Measurement is not included in the business
事業戦略・計画のプロセス内にない
strategies or plans
Do not know how to publicize the resultsinternally and externallyNo personnel consider that measurement is
評価を重要と考える職員がいない
important.
The top management 経営層の優先度が低い
places low priority on
measurement.
Funders
demandmeasurement
based on
資金提供者が無意味な指標での評価を要求している
meaningless indicators.

Current Situation Survey
現状調査(n=1,787～1,821)

70.9%

41.2%

66.6%

39.2%

何を評価してよいか分からないDo
not know what to measure
どのように結果を内外に伝達すればよいか分からない

71.6%

43.2%

64.8%

50.0%

61.9%

33.0%
40.7%
25.2%
18.2%

54.3%
53.6%

47.0%

UK
Survey (n-755)
英国調査(n=755)(n=1,787 - 1,821)
Source: “Current Situation Survey on Social Impact Measurement” (Nippon Foundation); “Making an Impact”* Both survey results show the total of answers “Quite applicable” and “Somewhat applicable.”* For the Current Situation Survey, the number of respondents differs for each option (from the upper, n=1,843; n=1,802;
n=1,814; n=1,815; n=1,812; n=1,815; n=1,816; n=1,814; n=1,811; n=1,795; n=1,787)