This report reviews methodologies used to evaluate social impact within impact investing contexts, highlighting their alignment with investor needs. Through an inductive analysis, the authors identify six essential attributes for evaluation frameworks—comparability, accountability, completeness, simplicity, optimality, and risk-awareness. They apply these criteria to widely used frameworks, finding that none fully address all six. The conclusion calls for either the creation of new models or substantial improvements to existing tools to ensure impact evaluation is robust, investor-relevant, and adaptable to diverse investment strategies

This article examines Social Impact Bonds (SIBs) within the emerging impact investing space—where investors seek both social/environmental outcomes and financial returns. It explores pivotal questions such as: How effective are SIBs at delivering measurable social impact? What challenges hinder their implementation—like data limitations, complex payment structures, and stakeholder alignment—and what innovations are emerging? The study critically analyses their structure and real-world deployment, concluding that while promising, SIBs face significant hurdles requiring clearer evaluation frameworks and stronger collaboration among public, private, and third-sector players

This article critically examines the application of Theory of Change (ToC) in evaluating impact investing. It argues for a more rigorous and accountable approach to measuring social and environmental impact, focusing on where it truly matters. The author explores how ToC can enhance evaluation practices, ensuring that impact investments deliver intended outcomes and contribute to learning within the field. It highlights the importance of robust evaluation for accountability and continuous improvement in impact investing.

This case study from Social Finance provides an overview of Development Impact Bonds (DIBs), distinguishing them from Social Impact Bonds (SIBs). It outlines the core management principles underlying these innovative financing instruments. The study explains how DIBs link funding to achieving specific, measurable social outcomes, thereby shifting risk from funders to investors and emphasizing results-based payments. It offers a foundational understanding of their structure and operational framework.