Evaluation Report Brief

REDF : Social Enterprise 

nationalservice.gov/research 1 

What is the community challenge? 

Across the U.S. over half of all unemployed adults with 

a disability report their disability being a barrier to 

employment. The individuals served by organizations 

REDF funds face similar barriers as well as lack of stable 

housing (own or rent their home for the entirety of a 

year), a conviction and jail sentence on their record, or 

no high school diploma. As a result, 80 percent of their 

income on average comes from government benefits 

and support from others.

What is REDF’s promising solution?

REDF has been funding non-profit organizations

running social enterprises since 1997. As part of 

its five-year strategy to transform how people 

with many employment barriers transition into 

the workforce, REDF partnered with the Social 

Innovation Fund to support and evaluate this 

strategy. Social enterprises are mission-driven 

businesses focused on hiring and assisting 

people who face barriers to work.

Program At-a-Glance 

Intervention: Social Enterprise 

Grantee: REDF

Subgrantees: 10 non-profit organizations running social enterprises

Focus Area: Economic Opportunity

Focus Population: Adults with barriers to employment

Communities Served: California (San Francisco Bay Area; Los 

Angeles)

What did the evaluation of REDF’s social enterprise portfolio find?

As a grantee of the Social Innovation Fund, REDF engaged an independent evaluator to evaluate its portfolio 

of social enterprises. Life and work-related outcomes were tracked for 282 workers at seven social enterprises 

over the course of the study, which found: 

 Social enterprise workers moved toward economic self-sufficiency and life stability 

 employment up from 18 to 51% 

 in stable housing up from 15 to 53% 

 dependence on government support down from 71 to 24% 

 Social enterprises produced $2.23 in social benefits for every $1 they spent (by reducing dependence 

on government support and increasing tax revenue) 

Results from the Impact Evaluation generally support the tracked outcomes listed above, although the 

statistical significance of these observations is mixed. This is perhaps due to unobserved characteristics of the 

sample that could not be controlled for or small sample sizes, a common difficulty when working with people 

experiencing instabilities such as histories of homelessness, unstable housing, and incarceration. 

To access the full evaluation report and learn more about CNCS, please visit nationalservice.gov/research.

Office of Research and Evaluation, Corporation for National and Community Service July 2015
Evaluation Report Brief

REDF : Social Enterprise 

Office of Research and Evaluation, Corporation for National and Community Service July 2015

nationalservice.gov/research 2 

Evaluation design, timeline and study locations 

Evaluation of these social enterprises by Mathematica Policy Research began in 2010 and finished reporting in 

2014. The evaluation included both assessing reported outcomes at multiple grantee sites as well as more 

closely observing the impact on employees of one of the social enterprises in REDF’s portfolio. 

Evaluation At-a-Glance 

Level of Evidence before* Evaluation: Preliminary+/Moderate

Level of Evidence** after Evaluation: Moderate

Evaluation Designs: Implementation Evaluation; Outcomes Analysis; 

Impact Evaluation (Quasi-Experimental Design); Cost-Benefit Analysis

Study Population: Workers at seven social enterprises (Eight social 

enterprises in Implementation Evaluation; one in Impact Evaluation)

Evaluator: Mathematica Policy Research

* SIF-supported interventions undergo a level of evidence assessment at the point of program entry and are

expected to advance that base of evidence through rigorous evaluation during the grant period.

**SIF and AmeriCorps currently use different definitions of levels of evidence. Study Locations 

How is REDF using the evaluation findings to improve? 

REDF supports a data-driven, continuous improvement and 

learning approach that involves REDF staff, consultants, and senior 

leadership of subgrantee organizations. Findings from the Final 

Report have been shared, reviewed and discussed, and together, 

social enterprise stakeholders are identifying the specific relevance 

and application of the findings, considering overarching lessons, 

and prioritizing areas of focus for the future. 

The content of this brief was drawn from the full evaluation report submitted to CNCS by the grantee/subgrantee. The section of the brief that 

discusses evaluation use includes contribution of the grantee/subgrantee. All original content from the report is attributable to its authors.

i

The Social Innovation Fund (SIF), a program of the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), combines public and private 

resources to grow the impact of innovative community based solutions that have compelling evidence of improving the lives of people in 

low-income communities throughout the United States. The SIF invests in three priority areas: economic opportunity, healthy futures, and 

youth development.