Complementary Goals: Prove and Improve

“In the years after founding Seed Effect, I initially thought of metrics as something we gathered for our donors:

a way to encourage continued generosity by demonstrating our wise stewardship and trustworthy application of funding. I could estimate and report on how many additional savings group members could be served with donations of various sizes.

But it began to bother me that when it came to what happened next — how those savings groups made a difference in participants’ lives — I could offer only anecdotal evidence.

Every time we invited a prospective member into our program, their decision came with an opportunity cost. They could spend an hour with us each week receiving training, hearing the Gospel, and saving with their neighbors.

But if they did, they’d have that much less time to spend in the market selling wares, in the fields farming, or at home nurturing their children.

In inviting South Sudanese refugees to join a Seed Effect group, we were asking them to trust us that this opportunity would help their families move from refuge to restoration. We certainly intended for that to happen. But we didn’t actually know. It became clear to me that loving our program participants required better understanding the outcomes of our program and ensuring their time with us would be time well spent. Data would help us do that.

Through monitoring and evaluation, we hoped to see a fuller picture of how we were delivering on our expressed or implied promises. We also hoped that gaining this broader perspective would reveal areas in which we could improve, translating our good intentions to better outcomes.

While responsible donors may ask about our impact, I came to see that metrics aren’t primarily for our donors.

In fact, donor-driven metrics suffer key limitations. In an effort to prove the merits of our approach, we may expend more energy defending the status quo than innovating to find better solutions. We may inadvertently or explicitly sweep findings under the rug. We may minimize failure or exaggerate success. We may stifle our own learning.

A desire to prove impact can paradoxically limit progress unless it is rooted in love and coupled with a desire to improve. Proving impact and improving services are mutually reinforcing goals rooted in love for those we serve.”