A principles-based framework that strengthens the quality, credibility, and usefulness of impact assessment reports — and guides better design of social and environmental projects from the outset.
While presented as distinct components, the principles are inherently interconnected. The same element of a report may address multiple principles. The emphasis is on overall integrity, consistency, and quality of the assessment process.
The assessment shall be anchored in a clearly articulated project purpose and causal logic. A well-defined problem statement, explicit objectives, and a structured theory of change enable practitioners to map how inputs lead to impact.
Impact is inherently shaped by context. Both project design and assessment shall be grounded in nuanced understanding of local realities, with attention to vulnerable or marginalised groups whose voices are often underrepresented.
There is no single 'correct' method. Methods shall be selected based on the questions asked, the context, and available resources. Triangulation strengthens reliability and reduces dependence on any single method.
The depth and scope shall be proportionate to scale, complexity, and risk. Materiality helps focus resources on what truly matters. Risk assessment informs where deeper analysis or safeguards may be required.
Findings shall be grounded in data that is collected, analysed, and presented with integrity. Transparency about gaps, uncertainties, and limitations is equally important to avoid misleading interpretations.
Claims about change shall be grounded in plausible reasoning rather than overstatement. Distinguishing between outputs, outcomes, and impacts is critical to avoid conflating activity with change.
Assessment shall respect rights, dignity, safety, and agency. Special attention to vulnerable groups. Conflicts of interest shall be disclosed. The report shall ensure no plagiarism.
Assessment shall support learning, not just accountability. Reflection on what worked, what didn't, and why — including unintended outcomes. Ensuring impact work remains dynamic and continuously improving.
Reports shall be clear, accessible, and open to scrutiny. Public disclosure strengthens credibility and enables external validation and learning.
Each principle is scored on a 0–10 scale. This common spine applies across all principles, with principle-specific guidance elaborating what each score level means in context.
Methodology, evidence, and causality carry the highest weight — reflecting that the credibility of findings depends most heavily on these foundations.
Upload your impact assessment report for an instant benchmark against the Standard, or explore a sample review to see the scoring in action.