You’ve honed your approach to measuring the impact on people you support – but what about the wider contribution your organisation makes? What’s the best approach?
As organisations are increasingly focused on wider change in places or creating system change to address the root causes of challenges and barriers, the importance of understanding the difference between attribution and contribution is critical for effective evaluation of social impact. These two approaches offer distinct ways of measuring how interventions drive change, and those in the business of assessing social value should be using both.
Why is this important?
Organisations are increasingly focused on creating system changes to address the root causes of challenges and barriers, in addition to supporting individuals affected by those challenges and barriers. This shift reflects a growing understanding that lasting social impact often requires structural changes, whether in policy, community dynamics, or broader societal systems. For example, The Felix Project has recently taken a leap forward in influencing change with the launch of Felix’s Policy Unit, calling for systemic change and to fight for policies that stop food waste and fight hunger. Another client, Prudence Trust has recently launched a new campaign bringing together four of the UK’s leading children and young people’s and mental health organisations, urging the Government to deliver urgent reform and investment to boost children’s mental health services in its forthcoming Spending Review and 10 Year NHS Plan. We could go on. . .
Targeted place-based solutions are also rightly on the increase. Significant disparities exist across different postcodes in the UK have exasperated in recent years, with where we grow up the key factor in health and wealth life chances. Addressing these inequalities requires targeted, place-based interventions that consider the unique needs and challenges of specific communities, often with organisations collaborating to address these complex social issues. And of course, the emphasis on social value in public procurement has heightened the push for place-based interventions that improve the economic, social, and environmental wellbeing of their areas.
Evaluating these interventions necessitates methodologies that capture the complex interplay of factors contributing to systemic change and account for multiple contributing factors. This is where attribution and contribution analysis play a crucial role in helping organisations assess and articulate their impact effectively.
What is Attribution Analysis?
Attribution refers to assessing the extent to which an observed outcome can be directly linked to a specific intervention. This method is often employed in scenarios where causal relationships need to be established with a high degree of certainty. It’s crucial for Social return on investment analysis as it allows organisations to get closer to understanding cause reality in order to quantify the value created by activities.
Purists might look to Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) or quasi-experimental designs to measure whether an intervention directly improves people outcomes. Given the huge costs involved, this is not an option for most. A more common approach, (and SROI best practice) looks to the stakeholders affected to report for themselves the extent to which an intervention created a change for them personally.
However, attribution has its limitations. It often isolates the intervention from other influencing factors, which can oversimplify the dynamics of real-world change, and it can be resource-intensive. As such, it is best suited to interventions with clear, measurable outcomes and limited external variables.
Summary of Attribution
Definition: A key assessment of causality, through analysis of how much of an outcome was caused by an intervention, often expressed numerically.
Considerations: Relies on the ability to establish direct causal links between interventions and outcomes. Often used in impact assessments & Social Return on Investment (SROI). Best when assessing impact on people engaged in a programme, and where outcomes can be isolated form other influencing factors.
What is Contribution Analysis?
In contrast, contribution analysis offers a broader lens for understanding change. This theory-based evaluation approach seeks to determine how an intervention contributed to observed outcomes within a larger system. Contribution analysis is particularly useful for evaluating complex initiatives, such as place-based or system-level interventions, where change results from multiple interacting factors
And it’s often about detailed mapping, identifying causal pathways and gathering evidence to assess whether the intervention played a role in the observed outcomes. Stakeholder engagement (alongside data triangulation) are again integral to this process, as they provide insights into the ripple effects and contextual factors influencing change. For example, evaluating a place-based approach to reducing youth crime would involve examining not only the intervention but also the role of community involvement, policy changes, and socioeconomic trends.
Summary of Contribution
Definition: A systematic approach to understand how an intervention contributed to the outcomes of an intervention, often expressed in mapping.
Considerations: Uses mapping approach, constructing and testing pathways using evidence, stakeholder insights and triangulation of data. Best for understanding complex interventions or issues, ripple effects place-based or systems-level evaluations. Recognises that change often results from multiple factors and acknowledges complexity.
When deciding between attribution and contribution analysis, charities and businesses should consider the following:
- What is the nature of the Intervention?
For targeted, measurable programmes with clear causal links, attribution is likely the better choice. For systemic or multi-faceted interventions, contribution analysis is more appropriate.
- What are the goals of the evaluation?
If the goal is to demonstrate direct impact to funders or stakeholders, attribution provides the clarity needed. If the focus is on understanding broader impacts and ripple effects, contribution analysis offers a richer perspective. Both are crucial for learning what works, and feeding into more insightful analysis.
- What are the resources available for evaluation?
Attribution methods like RCTs can be expensive and require controlled conditions, while contribution analysis demands stakeholder engagement and qualitative data collection.
Ultimately, the choice of evaluation approach should align with the organisation’s goals, the complexity of the intervention, and the type of impact they aim to demonstrate. Both attribution and contribution analysis are valuable tools for assessing social impact, but their effectiveness lies in their appropriate application.
At Bean, we use both approaches to really understand how organisations create change and how they can learn from evaluation to accelerate and amplify their social footprint.
Get in touch to find out more!
