Позитивные изменения. Том 4, №1 (2024). Positive changes. Volume 4, Issue 1 (2024)

“To speak of outcomes, and all the more of the impact of their projects and programs, in terms reflective of activity characteristics — ‘conducted so many events, spent so much’ — has long been outmoded in the ‘third sector’ and is becoming ever more challenging in the governmental sphere,” says Natalia Gladkikh. — “If we establish a benchmark for businesses wherein the end result is deemed significant not for its transformational nature but merely as a static form, this would represent a regression in the theory and practice of social project planning and social investment, methodologies and approaches to impact assessment developed thus far.”

It is also necessary to standardize the verifiability and justifiability of the employed social and ecological practices. Of crucial importance is the extent to which the utilized methodologies are substantiated and whether robust procedures for monitoring and assessment of changes — both intended and incidental effects arising within the course of a project or program’s execution — are in place. For NGOs, particularly when projects are financed externally — by grant-making entities or social investors — activities are regularly subjected to rigorous assessment and oversight. Conversely, when a project or program is initiated by a business entity, it lacks an overseeing body that would be obliged to pay close attention to the level of proof underpinning the practices utilized. If such guidance is not included in the standard, CSR programs may turn into a ‘space for experiments on people and nature.’

Additionally, the expert opines that it is essential to embed within the standard the concept of an assessment model. This pivotal term reflects the anticipated process by which results will be evaluated: how data on achieved changes will be collected, and who will be involved in these evaluative undertakings and how, at what stage. According to Natalia, the practice of soliciting assessment services from auditing firms for evaluating social impact is exceptionally uncommon among social investors or non-governmental organization. The mere fact that figures have been calculated correctly is unlikely to offer any significant insights or new knowledge to the project team or organization, particularly in terms of its sustainable development. When discussing an external, independent ‘evaluating’ party that implies a ‘mutually beneficial’ partnership, one should keep in mind universities, where expertise, researchers, and proven scientific approaches can be found.

“A standard will truly become truly significant and valuable when it transcends the prevailing narrative of ‘we’ll grade you — and you might get an F’ to enhance companies’ awareness of how they might further reflect their contributions to sustainable development in all its depth and beauty,” concludes Natalia Gladkikh. — “Once the standard encompasses varied approaches that enable any organization, regardless of size, to ‘see itself’ in a newer, more splendid light.” Described approaches and methods will assist companies in establishing their internal evaluative models, considering the unique aspects of their activities without any retributive implications. The chief advantage should inherently lie in the benefit it presents to the company itself — reveling in the transformations it prompts within the sphere of sustainability.”

In conclusion, Natalia Gladkikh put forth precise recommendations for modifications to be made to the standard. The fundamental point is that all activities conducted within the framework of sustainable development must meet criteria for evidence and validity. Specifically:

1. Issues to be addressed should be distinctly defined and their causes pinpointed, relying on existing data, knowledge from similar endeavors, etc.

2. All implemented programs and projects should describe their target audiences.

3. The action plan should be clearly defined and the relationship between the realized actions and the problems, their causes, as well as the planned results should be obvious, the experience of similar projects, the effectiveness of the chosen approach (social, ecological technology) should be studied.

4. The immediate results, social effects, and social impact should be clearly spelled out for each intervention.

5. The activity planning stage specifies the plan of activities and their results, as well as indicators to conclude on the achievement/ non-achievement of the planned changes.

6. For each project or program implemented within the framework of achieving sustainable development, an evaluation model should be developed, which implies a system of monitoring and evaluation of changes achieved, in accordance with the system of indicators.

7. For each project or program implemented within the framework of achieving sustainable development, it is recommended to calculate an evidence and validity index.