Tracking the Business and Social ROI of Grantmaking
July 23, 2012--Last month’s excellent 2012 CECP Corporate Philanthropy Summit included plenty of room for tackling important measurement issues.
As host of one of the breakout sessions—Tracking the Business and Social ROI of Grantmaking—I had the pleasure of leading a rich, interactive discussion among practitioners from companies such as Citigroup, Dow Chemical, Credit Suisse, and Lockheed Martin, in which we explored several key challenges and potential solutions. A few of the concept highlights:
Measuring for Greater Social Impact:
President & CEO, Citi Foundation,
Director, Corporate Citizenship, Citi
November 28, 2011 -- CECP spoke with Pam Flaherty, President & CEO, Citi Foundation, and Director, Corporate Citizenship, Citi about the company’s Results-Oriented Measurement System. Now three years into the initiative, Pam Flaherty shares the impetus behind the creation of the system, the greatest challenges encountered along the way, and the impact the company is able to track through the system.
CECP: Can you tell us about the work of the Citi Foundation?
Citi: The Citi Foundation supports the economic empowerment and financial inclusion of low- to moderate-income people so that they can improve their standard of living in communities where Citi operates. We make grants utilizing a results-oriented measurement framework that assesses the impact of the programs we fund. Our focus areas and what we seek to measure include:
- Financial Capability and Asset Building – Increase the number of low- to moderate-income adults and/or youth who adopt positive financial behaviors and accumulate and preserve financial assets
- Microfinance – Increase the supply of financial products supplied by microfinance institutions that improve and accelerate the financial inclusion of low- to moderate-income individuals
- Enterprise Development – Increase the number of micro or small enterprises that provide new income generation and/or employment opportunities for low- to moderate-income individuals
- College Success (in the U.S.) – Increase the number of low- to moderate-income secondary school students who are meeting the academic, financial and social milestones to enroll and complete postsecondary education
- Youth Education and Livelihoods (outside the U.S.) – Increase the number of low-income youth, ages 13-25, who demonstrate the skills needed to complete secondary school, become employed in a living wage job, start their own income-generating business or obtain postsecondary education or training
- Neighborhood Revitalization (in the U.S.) – Increase the number of small businesses, affordable housing units or community facilities that contribute to the economic and/or environmental sustainability of low- to moderate-income communities
CECP: What was the impetus behind the creation of Citi’s results-oriented measurement system?
Giving in Numbers: 2011 Edition
Alison P. Rose
Manager, Standards and Measurement
Committee Encouraging Corporate Philanthropy
October 27, 2011 -- CECP has had the privilege of collecting corporate giving data since 2001. The last ten years have yielded a storehouse of information that illuminates the relationship between corporate giving and the macroeconomic and cultural factors that influence businesses and their communities.
In 2010, the looming threat of a double-dip recession and widespread unease about the future of global markets significantly affected those factors. With unemployment rates remaining high, many communities in the U.S. and abroad struggled to find their footing. Moreover, the earthquake that devastated Haiti in January was only one of several severe natural disasters that commanded an international response.
As 2010 was the third in a series of strained and uncertain years, this edition of Giving in Numbers not only presents a profile of corporate philanthropy in 2010, but also seeks to answer the pivotal question: How has corporate giving changed since the onset of the economic downturn? The multi-year analysis in the opening section of this report offers a short answer: Companies do not always move in tandem. While some have responded to community need at levels that far exceed their contribution levels in 2007, other companies have cut back.