Позитивные изменения. Том 3, № 4 (2023). Positive changes. Volume 3, Issue 4(2023)

Expert of the project “Development of a Social and Economic Impact Assessment Model for NGOs” by the GLADWAY Foundation, Lean 6 Sigma Green Belt master

Vladimir Vainer

Positive Changes Factory, Director

Natalia Gladkikh

PhD in Psychology, Leading Expert The Institute of Social and Economic Design, Higher School of Economics

Ivan Smekalin

Analyst, Positive Changes Factory

Our Norilsk Endowment Fund is a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting the social advancement of Norilsk city and the Taimyr Dolgano-Nenets Municipal District (hereinafter the Territory, or Taimyr). Its primary goal is to facilitate long-term regional investments and provide financial support to non-profit initiatives focusing on vital sectors such as education, healthcare, culture, and sports, amongst other socially significant areas. The Fund’s operations are centered around involving committed citizens and stakeholders in the social development of the region. This makes Our Norilsk Endowment Fund a model organization, prioritizing institutional support for projects driving territorial development. This quality was one of the factors in formulating the assessment model for projects financed by the Fund.

This paper details the impact assessment model used by Our Norilsk Fund, developed through a collaborative effort with the team and experts from the Positive Changes Factory. In our opinion, this model is adaptable for other regions, and its various components — such as the evaluation criteria, indicators, and approaches for developing diagnostic tools — could be effectively utilized in formulating assessment models for federal projects and programs.

OVERVIEW OF THE ASSESSMENT MODEL

The evaluation model comprises two primary components:

1. Developing a Unique Assessment Profile[133], which delineates the project’s expected and actual contribution to changes based on seven universal socio-economic impact criteria. These are dependent on the region’s unique characteristics as well as global best practices in assessing territorial development projects. The assessment profile further includes four supplementary criteria to reflect the quality of the evidence base and the social technology utilized in the project. It also assesses the existence and effectiveness of a project data collection and monitoring system.

2. Project assessment via social impact indicators. For this, a comprehensive list of potential indicators was created, covering all financial support domains provided by Our Norilsk Fund. Moreover, a detailed algorithm has been developed and described for augmenting this list, should the project target different changes / activities or if the Fund’s list of support areas is expanded. The assessment relies on two key factors: the number of beneficiaries likely to experience the changes described by the indicators, and the quality of these changes, which is evaluated through a qualitative change assessment protocol. Additionally, an algorithm for conducting an overall assessment of all projects has been formulated. This comprehensive evaluation consists of three modules: aggregate analysis of project assessment profiles (representing the first component of the model), determining the change significance index based on the indicator analysis (the second component), and finally conducting an overall qualitative change assessment at the regional level. The first two modules merely summarize the data furnished by the projects. The third module, however, requires a separate study in the form of a regional survey based on the qualitative change assessment protocol methodology.

PROCEDURE FOR FORMULATING THE PROJECT ASSESSMENT MODEL

1. Any applicants seeking financial support from the Fund must assess their project against 11 criteria outlined in the Unique Assessment Profile (UAP). Each criterion is rated on a 1–5 scale, with 1 representing the lowest expression and 5 the highest. The application includes comprehensive descriptions for each criterion. For instance, the criterion “Development of the Region’s Human Resource Potential” is described as follows:

• Very low manifestation (1): The project does not incorporate measures to enhance professionalism and retain human resources in the region.

• Low manifestation (2): The project includes limited measures, which are not central to personnel retention.