Impact Management Project
Also written IMP · Impact Management Project (IMP) · Five dimensions of impact
The framework, used by the GIIN's IRIS+ system, that describes impact in five dimensions — What, Who, How Much, Contribution and Risk — with defined data categories for each.
In plain language
Two impact funds can both say they "improved livelihoods". One means 50,000 farmers earned a little more for a season. The other means 800 landless families moved permanently out of debt. The words are the same; the impact is not.
The Impact Management Project (IMP) gives a shared vocabulary to tell them apart. It breaks any claimed impact into five dimensions, each with standard data categories, so impact can be described, compared and managed.
In the workbook, IMP appears through IRIS+. IRIS+ is the impact accounting system offered by the Global Impact Investing Network (GIIN), which impact investors use to measure, manage and optimise their impact. The workbook says IRIS+ "measures impact through Impact Management Project (IMP) based on five dimensions."
How it works
The five dimensions (Chapter 6, Table 6.3):
| Dimension | IMP definition | Data categories |
|---|---|---|
| WHAT | What outcomes the enterprise contributes to, and how important they are | Outcome level in period; outcome threshold; SDG; importance of outcome to stakeholders |
| WHO | Who experiences the effect, and how underserved they are in relation to the outcome | Stakeholder type; geographical boundary; baseline level of outcome; stakeholder characteristics |
| HOW MUCH | How much of the effect occurs in the period | Scale: number of people experiencing the outcome (social outcomes only); Depth: degree of change; Duration: how long the outcome lasts |
| CONTRIBUTION | How the effect compares to what would likely have occurred anyway | Depth and Duration contribution, net of the change or duration that would otherwise have happened |
| RISK | Which risk factors are significant, and how likely the outcome is to differ from expectation | The type of impact risk, described using one of 10 risk factors |
The 10 impact risk factors: evidence risk, external risk, execution risk, stakeholder participation risk, drop-off risk, unexpected impact risk, efficiency risk, contribution risk, alignment risk, endurance risk.
IRIS+ around it. IRIS+ provides generally accepted definitions of impact categories and themes, and identifies common goals and core metrics sets by theme. That gives the industry a shared language. Because most impact investors focus on SDGs, IRIS+ core metric sets and its catalogue of metrics are aligned to the SDGs.
Neighbours in Chapter 6:
| Tool | Who | What |
|---|---|---|
| IRIS+ | GIIN | Impact accounting system; uses IMP's five dimensions |
| GIIRS | — | Ratings for companies and funds, analogous to Morningstar; the workbook says used by 6,000 companies |
| GRI | Est. 1997 with UNEP | Sustainability reporting standards: Universal, Sector (40 sectors), Topic |
| UN Global Compact | UN | Ten principles: human rights, labour, environment, anti-corruption |
A worked example
Illustrative impact fund and figures, described in the IMP's five dimensions.
Annapurna Impact Fund invested ₹12 crore in a company selling solar-powered cold storage to vegetable farmers in Kolar and Chikkaballapur.
| Dimension | What the fund reports |
|---|---|
| WHAT | Reduced post-harvest loss and higher farm income; linked to SDG 2 (zero hunger) and SDG 1 (no poverty); farmers rank income as their top priority |
| WHO | 4,200 smallholders with under 2 acres; baseline post-harvest loss of 30% of tomato output; average baseline income ₹6,500 a month |
| HOW MUCH | Scale: 4,200 farmers. Depth: loss cut from 30% to 12%, income up ₹1,900 a month (29%). Duration: expected as long as the units run — 8 years |
| CONTRIBUTION | Without the fund, a state subsidy would likely have given about a quarter of these farmers access to cold storage within 3 years. So the fund's contribution to depth is reduced for that share, and to duration by the years they would otherwise have gained it |
| RISK | Execution risk — rural servicing of units; drop-off risk — farmers reverting to selling same-day at low prices; external risk — power outages in monsoon |
What the framework changes. The headline "4,200 farmers helped" is only the scale half of HOW MUCH. The CONTRIBUTION line stops the fund claiming change that would have happened anyway. The RISK line names what could make the reported outcome wrong. A second fund reporting "50,000 farmers reached" but saying nothing on depth, duration or contribution has told an investor far less.
Why NISM asks about it
Chapter 6 (6.2.2, "Framework introduced by Global Investing Community") covers IRIS+, IMP's five dimensions and data categories, and the 10 risk factors, alongside GIIRS, GRI and the UN Global Compact. Chapter 7's second sample question asks which is "an impact accounting system which can be used by impact investors to measure, manage and optimize their impact" — IRIS+. Expect a question on the five dimensions, on which dimension "what would have happened anyway" belongs to (Contribution), and on the three data categories under How Much.
Common exam traps
- Five dimensions: What, Who, How Much, Contribution, Risk. "Why", "Where" and "When" are not dimensions.
- "What would likely have occurred anyway" is Contribution, not Risk.
- How Much = Scale, Depth, Duration. Scale counts people for social outcomes only.
- Baseline level of outcome is a WHO data category, not a How Much one.
- There are 10 impact risk factors. Evidence, external, execution, stakeholder participation, drop-off, unexpected impact, efficiency, contribution, alignment, endurance.
- IRIS+ is by the GIIN. GIIRS is a separate rating system; GRI is a reporting-standards body.
- Workbook typo. Table 6.3's WHO definition reads "how undeserved are they". It means underserved.
Check yourself
1.An impact investor asks: "Would these farmers have adopted drip irrigation within two years even without this enterprise?" Which IMP dimension does this question belong to?
- a)WHO
- b)WHAT
- c)HOW MUCH
- d)CONTRIBUTION
Show the answer
Answer: (d) CONTRIBUTION
CONTRIBUTION asks how the effect compares to what would likely occur anyway.
WHO is about which stakeholders and how underserved they are. WHAT is about which outcomes and how important they are. HOW MUCH is about scale, depth and duration of the effect. None of these subtracts what would have happened without the enterprise.
2.Under the HOW MUCH dimension of the Impact Management Project, "scale" refers to:
- a)The degree of change experienced by the stakeholder
- b)The number of people experiencing the outcome, for social outcomes only
- c)The time period for which the stakeholder experiences the outcome
- d)The enterprise's share of the outcome after removing what would have happened anyway
Show the answer
Answer: (b) The number of people experiencing the outcome, for social outcomes only
Scale is the number of people experiencing the outcome, and the workbook adds (social outcomes only).
Option A is depth. Option C is duration. Option D describes the CONTRIBUTION dimension, which also looks at depth and duration — but only the enterprise's share of them.
3.______ seeks to capture the deeper understanding of the change process and the context in which it occurs.
- a)Theory of Change
- b)The Logic Model
- c)The Outsourcing Model
- d)The Partnership Model
Show the answer
Answer: (a) Theory of Change
This is the workbook's description of the Theory of Change. It is narrative-driven and stresses the theories, assumptions and causal pathways behind a programme.
The Logic Model is the simpler, linear, visual picture of inputs, activities, outputs and outcomes. The Outsourcing and Partnership models are ways of organising an evaluation (Chapter 7), not planning frameworks.
Where this is taught
Free preparation for NISM Series XXIIIRelated terms
- Social Impact FundA Category I AIF investing primarily in social ventures and social enterprises, which satisfies the social performance norms laid down by the fund and may both take and give grants.
- Key Performance IndicatorA metric chosen to track the most critical aspects of a social project's performance; split into external KPIs used by funders for third-party assessment and internal KPIs for management control.
- Social Impact AssessmentA systematic evaluation of the social, ethical, cultural and environmental consequences of a project or organisation — positive and negative, intended and unintended — taking an "outside in" view.
- Theory of ChangeA structured, narrative, backwards-mapping method that sets out the causal pathway from a project's activities through intermediate outcomes to its ultimate impact, with its assumptions made explicit.