This criterion reflects whether the non-profit organization, both overall and at the project level, has established and implemented a system for evaluating media effectiveness. This involves collecting and analyzing data regarding the project’s coverage in traditional and social media. The data should be regularly gathered, analyzed, and the results promptly utilized in future media interactions.
For the ‘assessment hygiene’ criteria (8–11), recommendations are provided only for those criteria receiving low scores (1 or 2). Here are sample recommendations for criterion 8 (Presence of an Evidence Base for the Social Technology Used):
Table 1. Example of a set of indicators for a priority area
•
•
The second component of the model involves project assessment based on social impact indicators.
These indicators, developed from analyzing previous bids and existing thematic support areas, reflect the qualitative impact of the project. In the Table 1 an example of a set of indicators for a priority area.
When the project team believes that existing indicators fail to adequately capture the project’s impact, or if there are changes in the thematic areas supported by the Fund, the list can be supplemented. Such modification is conducted according to a defined algorithm. For new indicators, a universal formula is suggested: “What changes have occurred in the area of…? How do you assess the project’s contribution to these changes? How do these changes apply to you?” The quantitative assessment scales for these changes are akin to those used for the primary (universal) list of indicators.
It is recommended to engage project stakeholders in formulating the indicators, which may include: