Developing an Impact-Oriented Measurement System

The document outlines 'Stage 3' of the Impact-Oriented Measurement (IOM) system, focusing on 'Step 7: Developing a credible narrative'. It advocates for the use of contribution analysis—rather than strict attribution—to demonstrate how FSD interventions lead to systemic changes in financial markets. The process involves triangulating bottom-up monitoring (e.g., project results chains) with top-down evidence (e.g., national household surveys and landscape studies) to convince a 'sceptical observer' of the programme's impact. It also provides methodologies for aggregating quantifiable results and conducting Value for Money (VfM) assessments by monetizing sectoral benefits, such as reduced depositor losses in the SACCO sector in Kenya.

• FSD programmes should employ contribution analysis to build a narrative that would 'convince a reasonable but sceptical observer' of the programme's role in specific changes, such as increased access to financial services.
• To mitigate self-attribution bias and the risk of evaluations being overly shaped by the original logic, FSDs must systematically search for alternative explanations and document non-FSD contributions to impacts.
• A robust evidence base for contribution analysis requires triangulating multiple sources, including results chain monitoring, market actor interviews, landscape studies, and global or FSD-led research.
• When aggregating quantifiable results for impact or Value for Money (VfM) analysis, FSDs must manage risks such as double counting and inactive accounts; for overlaps between 5% and 95%, projects are encouraged to estimate and calculate each overlap.
• There are three primary approaches to quantifying a programme's contribution to results: claiming 100% of partner results, claiming a percentage based on the proportion of project funds provided (as recommended by DFID), or making an estimate based on the criticality of the FSD input.
• Value for Money (VfM) assessments for FSDs can be conducted by measuring the monetary benefit of specific quantifiable projects or by assessing the monetary benefit of broader sector trends, such as an increase in access.
• In a specific VfM example regarding the SACCO sector in Kenya, improving regulation was estimated to generate a benefit of approximately £19.24 million by reducing risks and losses associated with poorly regulated SACCOs.

APA

FSD Africa (2016). Developing an Impact-Oriented Measurement System. https://fsdafrica.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/11655-Impact-Oriented-Sys-Chaper-6.sv_.pdf

Chicago

FSD Africa. Developing an Impact-Oriented Measurement System. 2016. https://fsdafrica.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/11655-Impact-Oriented-Sys-Chaper-6.sv_.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=FSD Africa |title=Developing an Impact-Oriented Measurement System |date=January 2016 |url=https://fsdafrica.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/11655-Impact-Oriented-Sys-Chaper-6.sv_.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{fsdafrica2016developing, author = {{FSD Africa}}, title = {{Developing an Impact-Oriented Measurement System}}, institution = {FSD Africa}, year = {2016}, month = jan, url = {https://fsdafrica.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/11655-Impact-Oriented-Sys-Chaper-6.sv_.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }