57 Frameworks. One Unified Methodology.

We consolidate the world’s major impact measurement and evaluation frameworks into a single, sector-agnostic approach. Collect data once. Report to any stakeholder.

Core Principle

Collect Once, Report Many Times

The impact measurement landscape is fragmented across dozens of frameworks, each with different structures, indicators, and reporting formats. Organisations waste significant resources collecting the same data multiple times to satisfy different stakeholders.

Our methodology solves this by designing a single data collection architecture that maps to all relevant frameworks simultaneously. One set of indicators, one collection process, multiple reporting outputs — whether your stakeholders require SDG alignment, development finance standards, investor-grade impact metrics, or national evaluation criteria.

This is not a compromise or a lowest-common-denominator approach. It is a carefully engineered crosswalk system that preserves the specificity each framework demands while eliminating the duplication that wastes resources.

Assessment Framework

Five Dimensions of Impact

Every impact investment and every national evaluation programme needs to answer the same five fundamental questions. Our methodology structures measurement around these dimensions.

What

What outcome is occurring? How important is it?

Who

Who experiences the outcome? How underserved are they?

How Much

What is the scale, depth, and duration of change?

Contribution

Does the enterprise or programme drive this impact?

Risk

What could go wrong? How likely, and how severe?

Quality Assurance

Three-Layer Validation

A rating or diagnostic is only as valuable as its credibility. We validate every output through three independent layers to ensure that numbers reflect reality.

Layer 1: Quantitative Scoring

Structured scoring against empirical benchmarks from countries across four continents. The numerical baseline that makes comparison possible.

Layer 2: Expert Cross-Check

Subject-matter experts independently assess whether quantitative outputs align with their knowledge and field experience. A divergence between expert judgment and model output is a signal to investigate, not dismiss.

Layer 3: Practitioner Voice

The lived experience of the people who operate within the system every day. Voice interviews processed through AI-assisted extraction, with human validation before any results are used.

Technology

AI as Accelerator, Not Replacement

We use AI at every stage where it compresses time without sacrificing rigour: document review, cross-country data structuring, voice transcription and translation, theme extraction, and pattern detection.

But AI does not replace the three activities where human judgment is irreplaceable: stakeholder engagement with partners, validation of AI-extracted classifications, and the strategic interpretation that converts findings into actionable recommendations.

The methodology is AI-assisted, not AI-driven — a distinction that matters enormously for credibility with government clients and the evaluation community.

Clear Boundaries

What AI Does

Compresses desk review. Structures cross-country comparisons. Transcribes and translates voice interviews. Extracts themes from narratives. Detects statistical patterns. Generates draft reports.

What Humans Do

Conduct stakeholder engagement. Validate classifications against context. Interpret findings. Design strategies. Make judgment calls on recalibration. Build institutional relationships.

Core Differentiator

The Impact Rating System

The only solution combining methodological rigour with practical simplicity — quantify, compare, and optimise impact across your portfolio.

Aggregation Formulas

Multiple proprietary formulas calibrated for different investor types and portfolio strategies.

Dimensions Scored

Each investment rated across all five impact dimensions for comprehensive assessment.

Risk Categories

Scored across pre-investment, during, and post-investment phases with integrated risk adjustment.