Academy / Measurement & reporting
Course progress and additional readings
Measurement & reporting
You will learn: how to build a value map, choose and record a financial proxy, adjust for deadweight, attribution, displacement and drop-off, discount future years, calculate the SROI ratio and test which assumptions change it.
Who this is for: both roads, and it is optional. Funders or funded partners who have read when a dollar value is worth it and decided it is. Bring your outcomes, the evidence behind them, and what the work cost, including time and goods that were given rather than bought.
What is the SROI ratio, and which number should you report?
In short: the SROI ratio is the present value of adjusted outcomes divided by the present value of inputs. Two related numbers, net present value and the net SROI ratio, measure something different, so name the one you report.
THREE CALCULATIONS · KEEP THEM APART
Social Value International's Guide to SROI sets out the full sequence, from scope and stakeholders through valuation, adjustments, calculation and reporting. It also separates an evaluation of outcomes that have happened from a forecast of expected ones. Label which you are doing, and never let forecast value appear as an achieved result.
A ratio of 1.48:1 means an estimated 1.48 units of social value for each unit invested, under stated scope and assumptions. It does not mean anyone receives 1.48 in cash.
How do you build an SROI value map?
In short: one row per outcome, linking the stakeholder, the change, its evidence, its value and the adjustments, with the inputs and boundary written above. A row you cannot value yet stays on the map; it is not zero.
The SROI Guide calls this the Impact Map; many teams call it a value map. Start with the boundary: the activity, period, stakeholders, purpose, and the resources put in for that scope. Do not divide a whole program's benefits by one funder's grant.
Write outcomes before you look for any price. "Attended training" is an output; "kept a job for a year" is an outcome. Social Value International's guidance on understanding what changes includes intended and unintended, positive and negative changes, and its principles call for involving stakeholders. Keep a harm on the map even when you cannot price it.
| Part of the map | What to record |
|---|---|
| Scope and inputs | Activity, period, purpose, stakeholders, resources put in, including non-cash ones |
| Outcome and evidence | Stakeholder, change, indicator, quantity, period, source |
| Value | Financial proxy, unit, source, year, why it fits |
| Adjustments | Deadweight, attribution, displacement, duration and drop-off, each with a reason |
| Review | Status, owner, open questions, formula, date approved |
ONE VALUE MAP ROW · FICTIONAL EXAMPLE
Split a row when it mixes stakeholders or units, such as participant earnings and employer hiring costs. Then check whether two rows describe the same change; "less financial stress" and "better wellbeing" may overlap, and adding both counts it twice.
How do you choose a financial proxy?
In short: a financial proxy is a dollar approximation of an outcome's value. Choose one that matches the outcome, stakeholder, unit, place and year, keep the original figure and any conversion, and write down why. If nothing fits, leave the row unvalued.
Start with a one-line specification: "We want to value [change] for [stakeholder], measured in [unit] over [period], for [decision]." Social Value International's guidance on valuing the things that matter puts stakeholders' own view of importance at the center.
Look first at your own before-and-after records, then official statistics, peer-reviewed valuation studies and established resources with open methods. The UK Treasury's Green Book explains market and non-market methods, and its wellbeing guidance covers when wellbeing can be valued. They are UK appraisal references, not a list of proxies to transplant elsewhere.
| Proxy record | What to check |
|---|---|
| Outcome and stakeholder | The exact change valued, and whose view it represents |
| Source and method | Original publication, passage, method, limits |
| Unit and period | Per person, event, hour or year; over what window |
| Context | Population, place, currency, price year |
| Adjustments and overlap | Any conversion and why; what the value already includes |
| Decision | Why chosen, alternatives rejected, reviewer, date |
Read the units aloud before multiplying. People times a value per person-year is not people times a value per event. And do not replace a missing outcome with a related cost: a lower debt balance is not the value of less financial stress, and a typical annual wage is not the gain your graduates made.
How do deadweight, attribution, displacement and drop-off change the value?
In short: each removes a different part of the gross value that was not caused by the work. Apply them one after another to what remains, write down what each means, and never apply the same one twice.
| Adjustment | Question it answers | Workforce example |
|---|---|---|
| Deadweight | What would have happened anyway? | Some trainees would have found similar work alone |
| Attribution | How much is due to others? | A job center or family also helped |
| Displacement | Did the outcome push another one out? | A graduate filled a job another local jobseeker would have taken |
| Drop-off | How much does the effect fade each year? | Fewer graduates in the same job in year two |
Now a teaching calculation. All figures are invented to show the arithmetic; they are not the workforce fund's results or recommended rates. Take 10 outcome units, each valued at 1,000 currency units a year: gross first-year value 10 × 1,000 = 10,000. Assume 20% deadweight, 25% attribution, and zero displacement, stated openly for teaching; zero should never be an automatic setting.
Adjusted year-one value = 10,000 × (1 − 0.20) × (1 − 0.25) = 6,000. The percentages apply one after another to what remains, not as a combined 45% off the original, which would give 5,500.
How do you discount future years and calculate the ratio?
In short: lay out each year's adjusted value, apply drop-off, divide each year by (1 + discount rate) raised to the year number, add them up, and divide by the present value of inputs.
Assume the outcome lasts three years with 10% drop-off after year one: 6,000, then 5,400, then 4,860. Inputs of 10,000 are spent at the start (year zero), and benefits arrive at each year-end. The 5% discount rate is for teaching only; for a real analysis, choose and document the rate your purpose and governing guidance call for.
| Year | Adjusted value | Calculation | Present value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 6,000 | 6,000 ÷ 1.05 | 5,714.29 |
| 2 | 5,400 | 5,400 ÷ 1.05² | 4,897.96 |
| 3 | 4,860 | 4,860 ÷ 1.05³ | 4,198.25 |
| Total | 16,260 | Sum of unrounded values | 14,810.50 |
SROI ratio = 14,810.50 ÷ 10,000 = about 1.48:1. Net present value = 14,810.50 − 10,000 = 4,810.50, so the net SROI ratio is about 0.48:1. Keep full precision in the worksheet and round only what you display.
A sentence a reader can check: "In this three-year model, adjusted outcomes have a present value of about 14,811 against inputs of 10,000, a ratio of 1.48:1 under the stated value, contribution, duration and timing assumptions." Put the assumptions beside it.
A Sopact explainer on the SROI formula and how to read the ratio. Watch for how the numerator and denominator are defined; its figures are illustrations, not proxies to reuse. Watch on YouTube ↗
Which assumptions change the answer?
In short: change one assumption at a time and watch the ratio. The assumption that moves it most is the one that needs the best evidence, and the one to report plainly.
| Teaching scenario | Change from the central model | SROI ratio |
|---|---|---|
| Central | Three years, original assumptions | 1.48:1 |
| One year | Only year one counted | 0.57:1 |
| Two years | Years one and two counted | 1.06:1 |
| Lower proxy | Value per unit 25% lower | 1.11:1 |
| Higher proxy | Value per unit 25% higher | 1.85:1 |
| Higher deadweight | 40% instead of 20% | 1.11:1 |
Here, duration decides whether the ratio is above 1. That raises a practical question, what evidence shows the outcome lasts past year one, and it never justifies stretching duration until the number looks good. For the workforce fund, that evidence is 12-month retention. A low-to-high range of scenarios is not a statistical confidence interval.
Ask a colleague to rebuild the example without seeing your total. They should get 14,810.4956 for the present value of outcomes and about 1.48105 for the ratio. If not, check year numbering, what each percentage means, rounding, and whether an input was subtracted twice.
ASK ANY TOOL, INCLUDING OURS
Paste your value map into any AI tool and ask: "Recalculate each row and the ratio from these inputs, show every step, and tell me which assumption moves the ratio most. Do not fill any blank cell." In Sopact Sense, the outcome counts behind each row come from records that one ID per person keeps connected, and each answer from the AI Assistant links to the records you can open.
What can an SROI ratio not tell you?
In short: a ratio above 1 does not prove cause, savings or good value for money on its own, and a ratio below 1 does not prove the work failed.
The ratio covers only the outcomes you could value, under your assumptions. Harms and outcomes without a fair proxy sit outside it. Report it with the value map, the sensitivity table and a plain list of what was left out, and trace each count to its source.
Try it on your own reporting
- Write the boundary: activity, period, stakeholders, purpose and inputs.
- List outcomes with the people affected, including any harm, before you look up any value.
- For one outcome, fill the proxy record, or mark it "not yet valued".
- Apply deadweight, attribution, displacement and drop-off, one after another, with a reason for each.
- Discount each year, calculate the ratio, then run the one-year and lower-proxy scenarios.
Check your reasoning
For the fictional workforce fund, the boundary is Partners A, B and D, the 100 people they placed within 90 days, and the fund's grants plus any donated employer time as inputs. The earnings row stays "not yet valued" until wage before enrollment, hours and 12-month retention are collected. Deadweight needs evidence such as earlier cohorts; displacement needs a view of the local job market. The sensitivity test will likely show duration matters most, which points straight back to 12-month retention.
Questions teams ask
What is a good SROI ratio?
There is no benchmark that makes a ratio good in itself. Two analyses with different boundaries, proxies and adjustments cannot be compared by their ratios alone. A ratio is useful when the reader can see the value map and the sensitivity tests behind it, and when it informs a decision within one analysis, such as choosing between two designs valued the same way.
What discount rate should we use?
Use the rate required or recommended by the guidance that governs your decision, such as a government appraisal rule, and record why. The 5% on this page is a teaching figure. Treat prices and inflation consistently, and include the rate in your sensitivity tests if the choice is uncertain.
Can we leave out an outcome we cannot value?
You can leave it out of the ratio, but not out of the report. Keep it on the value map as "not yet valued", describe it with its count and evidence, and say how its absence might change the reading. This matters most for harms: a positive ratio with a known harm left unmentioned misleads.
Should inputs include volunteer time and donated goods?
Where they are part of the scope, yes, with a documented way of valuing them. Counting only the grant while valuing everything the program achieved makes the ratio look better than it is. If inputs arrive in later years, discount them the same way as outcomes.