Managing impact data from multiple stakeholders and implementation partners can be a huge challenge. Many organisations find it difficult to consolidate, manage, and analyze information in a way that allows them to report a single, accurate number—one that reflects their key performance indicators (KPIs) for sustainability or social impact.
If this sounds like your situation, you're not alone.
Many frameworks exist to track social impact or sustainability. Choose the top five indicators that are most relevant to your initiative. It may take time—sometimes up to three years—for all partners to fully understand and accurately report on these indicators.
One of the biggest challenges organisations face is defining indicators that truly reflect their social impact or sustainability goals. You might be using frameworks like the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) or the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) to guide you, but even within these, choosing the right indicators can be overwhelming. For example, if you’re running a clean water initiative, how do you measure success? Is it the number of water pumps installed or the reduction in waterborne diseases?
Many organisations find it takes time—sometimes years—for all partners and stakeholders to align on these definitions. This misalignment can lead to inconsistent reporting, misinterpretation of results, and difficulty in tracking progress over time.
Solution:
Example:
For a reforestation project, you might define the following indicators:
Just as accounting systems rely on monthly reports, social impact initiatives should follow the same schedule. This makes tracking outcomes from financial investments easier and ensures consistent reporting.
Many organisations make the mistake of collecting data sporadically—sometimes only once a year. This makes it hard to keep track of trends, spot early problems, or adjust strategy in a timely manner. The more frequent your data collection, the better you can respond to issues like underperforming regions, fluctuating resources, or misreporting from partners.
Solution:
Example:
In a community development program, gathering monthly data on employment rates, skills development, and community participation will help you adjust your strategies if certain communities are lagging behind.
Each partner should report on the same indicators every month. A structured data process enables you to average or summarize the results seamlessly.
Data comes from different sources—partners, stakeholders, field officers—and often in different formats. Without a clear structure, you’ll find it hard to compile all this data into a cohesive report. Discrepancies between partners’ reporting methods, the use of incompatible tools, or inconsistent definitions of indicators can all lead to confusion and inaccurate data analysis.
Solution:
Example:
For an education initiative, if some partners are tracking student attendance while others are tracking performance, you’ll struggle to combine these indicators meaningfully. But with a standardized structure, each partner would report on the same indicators, allowing for easier comparisons and trend analysis.
Don’t overcomplicate visualizations. Start with three core charts that reveal your impact trends over time. Stick with them to avoid being distracted by red herrings.
One common issue in impact reporting is overcomplicating the data. With so much information flowing in, it’s tempting to create multiple charts, graphs, and visualizations to display it all. However, this can lead to “analysis paralysis,” where decision-makers are overwhelmed by too much data and conflicting narratives.
Solution:
Example:
In a climate resilience program, you might use the following charts:
By sticking to these simple, consistent charts, you can easily communicate progress to stakeholders without overwhelming them.
Regular conversations about the data allow teams to assess performance objectively and ensure alignment with baseline goals and objectives. It’s crucial to have these discussions openly—no shame, no blame.
Once you’ve collected and structured your data, and generated the appropriate charts, it’s crucial to discuss the results regularly. Too often, organisations collect data but don’t use it to foster meaningful conversations. This can result in missed opportunities for improvement and a lack of accountability among partners.
Solution:
Example:
For a health initiative, if the data shows a decline in the number of patients treated in a specific region, the conversation can focus on understanding the cause—perhaps a shortage of resources or training—and developing a plan to improve performance the following month.
If your organization has tried to implement these steps but still struggles with the details, we can help. We support clients moving over 5,000 reports each month, structuring data into coherent reports, charts, and insights that ensure they reach their impact goals.
Try Our Tool at Susuate.com
Our tool simplifies indicator management, helping you quickly organize and visualize your impact data. Should you need further assistance, we also offer tailored packages to help with specific challenges along your impact journey.