Illustration by AI
In a crowded digital age where attention is fleeting and metrics often fail to tell the full story, a timely call is being made across Africa’s impact investment space: it’s time to rethink how we report impact.
That was the message behind the July 3 launch of a four-part webinar series titled “Advancing Impact Reporting,” co-hosted by the African Venture Philanthropy Alliance (AVPA) and global learning collaborative Impact Frontiers.
With participation from professionals across the continent, the session dug deep into common pitfalls, evolving standards, and real-world strategies for measuring and communicating impact.
The conversation was anything but academic. Drawing from live polling, open Q&A, and grounded case studies, the webinar explored the question:
What does it take to move from reporting outputs to communicating meaningful change?
“We’re not here to promote a particular approach,” said Nasri Adam, AVPA’s Director of Impact and Communications and Regional Director for East Africa.
“We’re here to reflect the state of play, to listen to the community, and to share real examples — not just concepts.”
The Challenge: Metrics Without Meaning
For many in the room, the frustration was familiar.
Social investors and NGOs often spend months collecting data, only to produce reports that struggle to convince — or even to communicate.
Matt Ripley, Director at Impact Frontiers, named the issue plainly:
“A lot of the data out there is what we call ‘floating metrics’ — they exist without context or benchmarks. Then there’s ‘flat data’ — it treats all data equally, regardless of the strength or source. And finally, ‘far-fetched claims’ — these are outcomes that go well beyond what the evidence can support, especially in terms of attribution.”
These issues erode credibility and fuel fatigue, Ripley warned, particularly among stakeholders who are seeking more than numbers on a page.
AVPA’s Nasri Adam added;
“Many reports are designed for funders, but funders are not the only audience. Communities, implementing partners, policymakers — they all read these reports differently. So, we must ask: who are we communicating to, and why?”
A Norm-Based Compass for Clarity
To respond to these gaps, Impact Frontiers presented its Impact Performance Reporting Norms, a framework designed through multi-stakeholder engagement across sectors.
The Norms call for reporting that is clear, comparable, and decision-useful — a step away from “just telling stories” and toward equipping stakeholders with information they can act on.
Ripley outlined four core characteristics of strong impact data:
- Directional – Does the data show positive or negative movement?
- Relative – Is it benchmarked or compared to something?
- Material – Is it relevant to the decisions stakeholders must make?
- Complete – Are the limitations and assumptions made visible?
This structured approach, he explained, is not about enforcing a single standard but about cultivating discipline — ensuring that impact reports don’t merely list activities but interrogate what changed, why, for whom, and at what cost.
The Proxy Debate: When Real-Time Data Isn’t Feasible
Not every outcome can be measured immediately. Some take years to manifest.
Others, like systemic shifts in gender norms or climate resilience, may elude direct measurement entirely.
In such cases, proxies — indirect indicators — are often used. But proxies can also be misused.
“There’s nothing wrong with using proxies,” said Ripley.
“But the question is: are they meaningful proxies? Are they being applied transparently? And are stakeholders clear that these are proxies, not primary outcomes?”
He cited examples where organizations reported a proxy — like the number of training sessions conducted — as if it were evidence of long-term behavioral change, without follow-up to validate the assumption.
The conversation around proxies also underscored the importance of involving stakeholders early in the design phase.
“When we talk about who defines success, it can’t be a purely top-down exercise,” Ripley emphasized.
LEAP Africa’s Model: From Systems Thinking to Stakeholder Dialogue
To ground these insights, Abdulahi, Senior MEL Coordinator at LEAP Africa, shared a detailed case study from the youth-focused pan-African organization.
LEAP Africa, now in its 23rd year, runs interventions across five thematic pillars — education, entrepreneurship, employability, active citizenship, and health.
It operates in over 48 African countries and supports a range of actors, from youth entrepreneurs to grassroots NGOs.
“What we’ve learned,” Abdulahi said, “is that the journey to impact reporting ends at the beginning and begins at the end.”
He explained that for LEAP, effective communication of impact starts with program design.
“You can’t bolt on a reporting process at the end. You have to involve stakeholders from the start — donors, communities, partners — and clarify what matters to them, what success looks like in their eyes.”
LEAP employs a dual lens: internal systems for organizational learning and external-facing tools for ecosystem engagement.
One notable initiative is their MEL Advisory, a hybrid body that includes a community of practice, webinars, and shared knowledge products.
Telling the Story Beyond the Dashboard
While numbers are necessary, they are rarely sufficient. Abdulahi outlined LEAP’s threefold approach to communicating impact: stories, research, and reports.
The organization’s flagship Social Innovators Programme (SIP), running for over a decade, has generated case studies and longitudinal research such as “From Resilience to Transilience” and “The State of Social Entrepreneurship in Africa.”
These are public goods, Abdulahi noted — meant to benefit not only LEAP but the broader ecosystem.
“You have to ask: what has changed, why has it changed, who contributed to the change, and under what circumstances?” he said.
“And equally important, what didn’t work?”
This honest reflection, combined with an insistence on stakeholder validation and contextual nuance, has helped LEAP refine both its interventions and its reporting.
Attribution vs Contribution: What Matters?
A recurring theme in the session was the tension between attribution (claiming specific change) and contribution (acknowledging a shared role in broader change).
Abdulahi was emphatic: “There’s nothing like attribution in this part of the work that we do. There’s always something happening somewhere, and there are always other lived experiences. Our job is to map the contribution landscape — not claim sole credit.”
This mindset also influences how LEAP measures beneficiaries. “We distinguish between direct and indirect beneficiaries — but with caution,” he said.
“Sometimes, it’s based on average family size or the reach of secondary partners. Other times, we rely on self-reported numbers from grantees or supported startups.
But we always accompany these numbers with context and narrative. Numbers don’t speak for themselves.”
He cited standardized templates and guidance LEAP provides to implementing partners, drawn from sector benchmarks like those developed by Oxfam, to ensure consistency and transparency.
Toward a More Accountable and Localized Future
As the session closed, the speakers agreed that strong impact reporting is not a box-ticking exercise — it’s a strategic asset for accountability, learning, and influence.
“We need reporting that is both locally rooted and globally informed,” said Abdulahi.
“We need to ask: is this data useful to African stakeholders — not just to global donors?”
This principle is part of what AVPA calls “catalytic capital,” said moderator Samuel Mutisya, Programme Manager at AVPA.
“We are keen to unlock more resources in Africa by strengthening how we demonstrate value, especially to public sector partners and local investors.”
Matt Ripley closed with a reflection on systems change and stakeholder engagement.
“It’s not just about what you measure it’s about who defines value. Are we involving affected people and communities in the decisions that shape their futures?”
What’s Next
This session was just the beginning. Future webinars in the series scheduled for August, September, and October will explore additional dimensions such as stakeholder co-creation, narrative design, and real-time decision-making.
Participants were encouraged to share their case studies and approaches.
“We want this to be a living conversation,” Nasri Adam emphasized. “Let’s build a community of practice that’s honest, reflective, and unapologetically African in its orientation.”
For those who missed the session, the full recording and resources, including tools from Impact Frontiers and case studies from LEAP, will be made available via AVPA’s mailing list.
