- Definition
- Guidance
- What to avoid
- External links
Definition
Measuring impact is about quantifying the effect asset transfer has on the asset and the surrounding area. This includes both the financial and non-financial impacts of the transfer.
Guidance
Measuring impact must be considered from the outset of the project. Local authorities are more likely to agree to asset transfer when the outcomes are measured. This is important when an asset is transferred for less than market value. In these cases local authorities must be sure there are tangible benefits that outweigh the lost revenue.
There is no standard method to measure the impact of asset transfer. This reflects the relative freshness of asset transfer and the uniqueness of each scheme. In deciding how to measure impact it is useful to breakdown the analysis and separated out the effect on the asset and the effect on the surrounding area.
Measuring the effect on the asset can include changes to the:
- revenue generated by the asset
- costs incurred to maintain the asset
- quality of the building
Measuring the effect on the surrounding area can include changes in:
- inward investment
- crime levels
- health outcomes
- unemployment
- educational achievement
- environmental conditions
Some of these impacts are financial and can be measured precisely. The developing Social Return on Investment (SROI) standard attempts to put a monetary value on non-financial benefits. There is genuine debate about how meaningful this is and doubts about its feasibility. What is important is developing indicators to measure non-financial benefits robustly. These should be identified at the outset of the project to demonstrate the intended benefits of the asset transfer.
The indicators used will vary on a project-by-project basis by type and scale. Some projects will be focused on raising aspiration in the local area while others will centre on working with disaffected youths. The content of the project will dictate which indicators are appropriate. Similarly smaller projects should identify more localised indicators. Asset transfer organisations should work with local authorities to select the appropriate indicators at the point of transfer.
What to avoid
Measuring impact must not be overcomplicated. It is important to select a limited number (2-4) of non-financial indicators. Choosing too many creates a burden in terms of data collection and can obscure the core impact of the project. Another mistake to avoid is choosing an indicator that is difficult to collect or calculate. Prior research into available statistics is needed to avoid this.
Asset transfer organisations should avoid making decisions ‘on the hoof’. Measuring the impact of asset transfer must involve end users and members of the community. The key benefit of asset transfer is that it includes people and this principle should apply when measuring impact.
Financial comparisons should be considered carefully. There is a real danger that key costs are not included. Local authorities sometimes place support-in-kind for assets inside general budgets. Comparisons must be apples-for-apples to give an accurate reflection.
External Links
Measuring value: A guide to Social Return on Investment (SROI), New Economics Foundation
http://www.socialauditnetwork.org.uk/
Measuring Social Value in Asset Transfer, Presentation by Tony Rich, DTA