Inside our working groups
Our working groups are where the real work of the Impact Valuation Hub is happening, investors coming together to address the field’s top challenges. This post gives a little insight into what's been happening inside these collaborations since they started in September/October.
Impact valuation is constantly evolving, and investors are working through difficult questions about how to measure, attribute, and manage impact across different contexts. The essence of the Impact Valuation Hub is building and advancing the field in a way that is practical and useful for investors to implement. Our working groups do this by bringing investors together to pool their knowledge, contribute case studies, and develop guidance collectively, drawing on both our knowledge partners and the experience of ecosystem members.
These aren't just discussion forums. Members are actively co-creating the resources they need. Contributors get to shape the guidance that will influence the field, learn from peer experiences, test their approaches against others, and build relationships with investors facing the same challenges. All members get access to the frameworks, case studies, and guidance created from this collective work.
Here's what the three working groups have been working on:
Impact Valuation Across Investment Stages
While impact valuation is gaining traction, how it’s applied in practice varies widely depending on the investment context. Early-stage investments face challenges like limited data and high uncertainty, while later-stage or listed investments offer more standardized reporting but assessing additionality becomes more harder. This working group is developing a framework that addresses these differences and the role of impact valuation at different points in the investment cycle.
What they're working on:
Developing an impact valuation comparative framework across investment stages (seed, early-stage VC, growth, PE, infrastructure, listed equity)
Identifying how impact valuation differs across stages, covering the following topics: Objectives, Reference Scenarios, Types of impact, Timeframes, Data collection / Data Validation, Impact Reporting / metrics, Stakeholder involvement, Limitations and challenges, Impact post-exit, Decision use / integration in investment process, Added value for portfolio company, Integration with financial valuation
Expected output:
White paper capturing the insights from the group, including:
Comparative table of impact valuation methods by investment group,
Resource recommendations for investors as different stages,
Case study examples
Co-chairs: Astanor and Impact Institute
Social Impact
While environmental impact often has clearer measurement pathways, social impact valuation remains more nuanced. This working group is building on the existing Impact Valuation Playbook to develop deeper guidance specifically for social impact, covering frameworks and methods for measuring pathways related to topics like health and education (including eQALY, WELLBY, WALY, SROI, among others), and looking at how different approaches can be applied in practice.
What they're working on:
Developing social impact guidance to complement the Playbook's seven actions
Some challenge areas raised by members already have 'answers' in existing practice, while others highlight gaps where there isn't strong guidance or consensus yet.
The group is therefore designed as a mix of learning and co-developing new guidance on social impact valuation
Expected output:
A collection of case studies on social impact challenges and a practical guide/FAQs that complements the Playbook, co-created by the investor community.
Co-chairs: Valuing Impact and Social Value International
Attribution & Additionality
Impact is rarely created in isolation. Companies, their business partners, investors, governments, and intermediaries often work together to drive change. This creates challenges for attribution (who gets credit?), additionality (what would have happened anyways?), and impact reporting integrity (how to avoid misleading overlaps or exaggerations of impact creation). Methodologies are emerging, but current practices vary substantially.
What they're working on:
What methodologies exist to attribute and allocate impact (both horizontally and vertically) among actors?
How to integrate counterfactual reasoning and whether we should assess additionality, especially when capital is not obviously catalytic
What are the boundaries of responsibility when value chains and ecosystems are involved?
How to balance precision and accuracy with practical use.
Expected output
White paper publication with:
A shared definition of horizontal and vertical impact attribution
(Non-exhaustive) overview of existing attribution frameworks and where these have been applied
Description of investor use cases, highlighting the value of attribution, ideally illustrated by investor case studies
Join the conversation
These working groups are still in their early stages, and new members are welcome to join. Whether you're working through these questions yourself or have approaches to share, there's room at the table. Every recording, resource, and output is available to members through our platform, so you can catch up on discussions and contribute your insights.
Learn more about membership here.