Exploring the Needs of IMM Practitioners

Anyone who designs or implements impact measurement and management (IMM) in a social finance context. This might include impact officers, impact analysts, impact consultants, evaluators, learning professionals, and others working to understand and improve impact. Participants may come from investing, evaluation, philanthropy, social enterprise, or related fields. Individuals representing themselves or their organizations are welcome to get involved.

This effort is being led by three IMM practitioners — Courtney Bolinson, Laura Budzyna, and Catherine Dun Rappaport. See our Team page for more about us!

We've heard from many IMM practitioners that there may be gaps in the professional infrastructure available to support their work. This initiative is designed to better understand those needs, determine whether they are broadly shared across the field, and explore ideas for how they might be addressed. See About this Initiative for more!

The landscape analysis includes three phases:

• A global survey to gather broad input from IMM practitioners across geographies, sectors, and roles.
• Follow-up interviews to explore emerging themes in greater depth and add qualitative context to the survey findings.
• Three co-design workshops to interpret the findings, explore their implications, and generate and refine possible pathways forward.

Throughout the process, we will share what we are learning and invite practitioners and organizations to engage in the conversation.

• Current State: "What are we doing now?" Where are IMM practitioners currently accessing the resources that help us build community and advance our practice? To what extent are those resources meeting our needs, and where are they falling short?
• Problem Framing: "What do we need?" Are there needs that are broadly shared across IMM practitioners? Do we perceive gaps in the existing spaces/offerings? What are our unmet needs, and which ones matter most?
• Vision: "What are our ideas?" What infrastructure and resources do IMM practitioners think would meet our unmet needs? How would they best be brought to life?
• Profiles: "Who needs what?" How do needs and perspectives differ across the spectrum of IMM practitioners (by years of experience, internal vs. external role, institution type, etc.)?

We don't know—and that's intentional.

The goal of this initiative is to gather data on what IMM practitioners need and their ideas for how those needs might best be addressed. We do not have a predetermined vision for what the solution should be or who should implement it.

The findings may suggest that existing organizations are well positioned to address the identified needs. They may point toward stronger collaboration across existing efforts, new programs or initiatives, or, if the field believes it is necessary, the creation of something new. We see this initiative as the beginning of a community conversation, not the conclusion.

Absolutely.

One possible outcome of this landscape analysis is that existing organizations are already well positioned to address many of the needs that emerge. Our role is not to advocate for a particular solution, but to help the field better understand the challenges and opportunities so that practitioners and organizations can decide together what comes next.

Yes. Many organizations provide valuable support to IMM practitioners through trainings, convenings, standards, research, communities of practice, and other initiatives.

This landscape analysis is not intended to replace or compete with those efforts. Instead, we're seeking to understand whether practitioners experience unmet needs across the broader ecosystem, what those needs are, and whether there are opportunities to strengthen coordination, fill gaps, or better connect existing resources.

We are actively engaging with the organizers of related initiatives to complement—not duplicate—their work. We have spoken with several organizations and individuals working in this space and hope to continue collaborating throughout the process.

If you're leading an initiative that overlaps with this effort and we haven't connected yet, we'd love to hear from you.

Our intention is for the findings to be openly shared with the field. We hope they will be useful to practitioners, organizations, and anyone interested in strengthening IMM practice.

No. This is currently a volunteer effort led by three IMM practitioners who care deeply about strengthening the field. No organization is funding or directing this work, which allows us to remain institution-neutral as we listen to practitioners and explore possible paths forward.

We don't know yet—and that's one of the questions we're hoping the community will help answer.

Some ideas may fit naturally within existing organizations or initiatives. Others may require new partnerships, funding, or forms of collaboration. We hope this process will spark a conversation not only about what the field needs, but also about what it would take to make those ideas a reality.

You can share the survey with your network, help conduct interviews, participate in co-design workshops, and help disseminate the findings when they are published. If you are interested in helping out, sign up to stay in the loop.

No. The co-design sessions are the final phase of the landscape analysis. They are opportunities to co-interpret the survey findings, explore their implications, and brainstorm possible pathways forward. This initiative is designed to inform the conversation, not to make decisions on behalf of the field.

Our role is to gather perspectives, identify themes, and facilitate conversations about what IMM practitioners and the broader ecosystem need. We will openly share what we learn and convene opportunities for practitioners and organizations to explore possible paths forward together.

Any future decisions about implementing ideas, creating new initiatives, expanding existing ones, or investing resources will ultimately be made by the organizations, funders, practitioners, and partners who choose to champion those efforts. Our hope is simply to provide the evidence, shared understanding, and forum needed to support those decisions.