Impact is what changed for your work, not what we shipped.
We measure a grant by what your organization can do afterwards that it could not do before. You define that. Not licences handed out, hours logged, or systems deployed.
You define success, not us
The easiest numbers to report mean nothing. Tools handed out, projects delivered, organizations reached. Those count what we did, not whether anything got better for you.
So there is no single measure across every grant. Before work starts, you write down what should be different if this works. That is the measure.
For one organization that might be a caseworker getting a day a week back from data entry. For another, a service people can finally do from home. For someone at the very start, just getting far enough to test the idea. These are not comparable, and they are not meant to be.
What we hold ourselves to
- You set the measure
- You say what success looks like, in your own words, before work starts. We do not swap in a number that is easier for us to report.
- It has to keep working
- A system that breaks the month after we leave is not impact. It has to still run, and still be fixable, when we are gone.
- It cannot depend on us
- If it only works while you have access to us, that is dependency. Accounts, passwords, documentation, and training go to you so it does not.
- We say what did not work
- Some grants will not go the way anyone hoped. Reporting only the good ones would make the record worthless.
Case studies and reporting
This is where the record will go: who we supported, what they set out to change, and what happened. It is empty on purpose. We will publish results when there are real ones.