"Social Entrepreneurship has brought a new vision to the field of philanthropy and, with it, a different perspective on evaluation. In fact, many familiar approaches to evaluation in philanthropy miss the key criteria that funders consider essential to success within the field of Social Entrepreneurship.

Within this young field, funders have invented their own ways of assessing performance, often independently of parallel efforts by their colleagues. As a result, a review of prevailing practices elicits different but overlapping solutions to a common set of problems.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the various approaches to evaluation in Social Entrepreneurship today, documenting the practices currently in use so that new entrants to this emerging field will not need to reinvent the tools already developed by its pioneers. At times, these newer ways of thinking seem better suited to the messy realities of social change than some of the more familiar approaches currently used in philanthropy. Conversely, the pragmatic approach to evaluation within the field of Social Entrepreneurship sometimes lacks the discipline and reliability of more wellestablished approaches.

The International Center for Not- for-Profit Law (ICNL) has produced for USAID this report summarizing the major findings of its research into accreditation andcertification programs.

The project considered:

• existing efforts to develop organizational accreditation/ certification programs throughout the development, business and non-profit communities, and the evidence to date regarding their usefulness in enhancing the credibility, transparency and accountability of the rated  organizations;
• the benefits, whether tangible or intangible, financi
  

The Global Exchange for Social Investment (GEXSI) organized a Roundtable Discussion on the theme of the Global Social Investment Agenda on December 9, 2004 at the GTZ House in Berlin.

The Roundtable Discussion was attended by representatives of over 30 different organizations who are involved in social investment, grantmaking, technical assistance and capacity-strengthening activities in developing countries.

Four themes were covered at the Roundtable Discussion: (a) the Strategic Context of Social Investment, (b) Financial Instruments for Social Investing, (c) Leveraging Aid for Social Investment, and (d) Global Trends in Social Investing.

Global giving is on the increase, but much more is needed if it is to contribute to solving some of the world’s most urgent problems. Alliance Magazine asked a number of people involved in the philanthropy world what they thought it would take to really get global philanthropy going. How could more individuals be induced to give more substantially? How could the trickle be made into a flood?

The discussion ranged over a wide area, taking in topics such as tax incentives, diaspora philanthropy and measurement. It considered both motivation for, and means of, giving.

Among the things that emerged clearly was the feeling that givers, both institutional and individual, have to be brought into more direct and personal contact with the countries where aid is needed, and with the problems philanthropy should be helping to solve. 

Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and donors increasingly face the twin challenges of demonstrating effectiveness in their work and accountability in their relationships with various stakeholders. Donors, on one hand, are particularly concerned about accountability of NGOs in the efficient and effective delivery of services. NGOs, on the other hand, are often concerned that accountability to donors can overshadow and overwhelm their accountability to communities and to their own missions.

The intent of this workshop was to find common ground for building partnerships that could improve both effectiveness and accountability. The workshop posed two broad questions:

• How can donors assist NGOs in improving their effectiveness, efficiency, and governance?
• How can NGOs assist donors in better understanding their needs, constraints and priorities?

One of the defining features of non-profit organisations is that their key resource is an expanding and self-renewing one -- “people power”. Paradoxically, however, it is a resource that is hard to tap and sustain.

David Bonbright's guest editorial in the journal AccountAbility Forum introduces Keystone (then known as ACCESS), and describes how the initiative is setting out to link performance, resourcing, and accountability through stakeholder engagement.

Article by David Bonbright on Keystone (then known as ACCESS) and "What we take for granted" from the March 2004 Edition of Alliance Magazine

The extraordinary rise to influence of NGOs over the past two decades has been
the twentieth century’s most important progressive social innovation. And it is this
more than anything else that has driven concerns about NGO accountability.

Many observers are convinced that the funding streams for nonprofits would both function better and be far deeper if we had a firm handle on effectiveness in the “social sector.” If only we could measure return on investment (ROI) in that sector, and move away from giving toward investing, the floodgates of funding would open, and capital would flow downhill to initiatives with the highest ROI.

For many opportunities in the social sector, you have to return to the fundamental question we started with: what’s your theory of change? Whatdo you think will bring about the result you want?

Simon Zadek reflects on the upsurge of interest in the accountability of not-for-profit, civil society organisations, and introduces the Keystone initiative (then known as ACCESS).