2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
MONITORING OF IMPACT INVESTMENT FUNDS
Renato Luiz Proença de Gouvêa
BrazilianDevelopment Bank - BNDES
Roberto de Oliveira Pereira
BrazilianDevelopment Bank - BNDES
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
1
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
ABSTRACT
Investment Impact Funds are similar to Venture Capital funds in several aspects, but
with one fundamental difference; their performance is also measured by the benefits provided
to lower income classes. Funds invested in startups: induce management and governance
changes, suggest projects to raise capacity and search for new business opportunities. These
support activities demand continual screening to recognize market changes and lapses in
performance to decide what actions are needed to enhance the startup’s evolution. As a
contribution to the impact fund’s management, the developed model presented in this text
assists the monitoring from investor's internal activities to the observation of social benefits
and return of investment. Two models used by the development banks to plan, monitor,
evaluate and communicate their investment performance were used to create the final model
to monitor investment impact funds. So, investment impact fund’s complexity was
represented by a synthesis of these two models: “Logical Framework” and “Outcome
Mapping”. Logical Framework focuses on investment’s impact chain and Outcome Mapping
on the change process behavior of the partners, in this case management and governance
improvement. In the end, the proposed synthesis model is applied to hypothetical case, where
the whole process of investment impact funds is described.
Keywords: funds, impact investing fund, monitoring, Logical Framework, Outcome
Mapping, new firms, startups, development bank
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
2
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
MONITORING OF IMPACT INVESTMENT FUNDS
INTRODUCTION
The public sector often uses management tools originally developed for private companies. In
this paper, an inversion of this will be proposed: the adjustment of management tools
developed in government and multilateral institutions for monitoring startups supported by
“impact investment funds”, which are essentially private funds. Impact investment funds are
similar to the Venture Capital (VC) funds, with a crucial difference: the performance of
impact funds is assessed both in relation to the social impact generated and to the capital
return. The main contribution of such funds is the supporting of innovation in products and
services targeted at lower income classes.
Such funds constantly monitor the development of companies supported through decision
making concerning new support actions until disinvestment, which takes place when it is
deemed that the investment has achieved the expected return or that the company lacks
potential to achieve its goals. In order to prepare a model for monitoring impact investment
funds, expertise of the Government and Multilateral Development Financial Institutions
(GMDFIs) is used. For decades such institutions have been developing instruments for
supporting the management cycle of their initiatives, as well as improving planning,
monitoring and assessment routines. One of the focuses of such activities is the monitoring of
products and services delivered and the scope of the end goals of projects and programs
supported. The proposal for monitoring such funds is based on a model that summarizes two
tools: Logical Framework and Outcome Mapping.
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
3
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
VENTURE CAPITAL AND IMPACT INVESTMENT FUNDS
Venture Capital Funds
The European Venture Capital and Private Equity Association defines Venture Capital as
investment in companies in the initial stage of development with expected profits that are
much higher than the opportunity cost. Such high return is due to the high growth potential
and to the value added by managers of such funds to the companies.
According to the National Venture Capital Association of the United States, the main
characteristics of the Venture Capital investments are i) the companies that receive the
investment are usually privately held corporations; ii) most companies have fast growth
potential, are innovative and belong to the high technology sectors; iii) investment provides
assistance for the development of the company and of new products or services, taking a high
risk with expected profits; iv) invested resources come from private funds, pension funds,
gifts, foundations, companies and individual investors; v) investors usually transform their
interests into shares of the companies.
Research conducted by Fred Dotzer (2001) reported the main benefits to the business
ofVenture Capital funds, according to entrepreneurs: financial management, hiring of
personnel for higher management, strategic instructions, working capital planning,
organizational planning, performance monitoring and feedback, and building relationships
with other companies.
The funds must continuously monitor the company’s progress and actively participate in its
management to guarantee that VC investments generate the value expected by its investors.
The purpose is to detect deviations or problems, aid decision making concerning actions
necessary for the company’s progress and make strategic changes from time to time. Such
monitoring is planned in the initial stage of financial investment, and includes a series of
follow-up actions: meetings, visits, boardroom participation and preparation of reports. Such
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
4
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
monitoring activities demand significant effort from the investment fund managers, which
may lead to increased management costs. For such reason, VC funds often establish
partnerships with “company accelerators” after investment of capital. (Kaplan, Strömberg,
2001)
The accelerator´s funds complement VC funds by selecting small startups with growth
potential, usually specializing in the same sector, by providing strategic and operational
instructions by means of mentors, connecting the company to networks for the exchange of
experience and technologies and by attracting new investors and clients.
The relationship of accelerators with startups usually lasts from three to six months. After this
term, more resources are demanded in order for the the further development of the startup. At
such stage, the accelerator eventually transfers its interest to other larger investors (Mille and
Bound, 2011).
Impact Investment Funds
Since the expression “impact investment” was first coined in 2007 during a meeting of
officers at the Rockefeller Foundation, this type of investment has been spreading all over the
world (Addis, McLeod, Raine, 2013).
The most distinguishing feature of impact investment is its purpose of reaching a positive
social, cultural and/or environmental benefit with financial return. The financial return
differentiates the impact investment from philanthropic support. The intentional design aimed
benefits for the society separates it from other traditional investments.
Impact investment encourages innovations focused on society’s lower socialeconomic
classes. Such private investments can complement the action of governments for improving
social services and may provide solutions that philanthropic interventions usually do not
achieve. These funds invest in several areas: culture, community development, education,
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
5
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
employment, health, environmental management, sustainable agriculture, renewable energy,
justice and housing (RIIA, 2013).
These funds join private and public interests to combineprofitable investments to achieve
social goals, a blended value. The International Finance Corporate (IFC), for example,
teamed up with the insurance company New York Life Insurance to create a fund for
supporting the creation of jobs for small and medium startups (SMEs) in the City of Sichuan,
China. (Clark, Emerson, Thornley, 2014)
Startup strategy must be adapted constantly to react to changes inthe market. The demands of
developing effort to build social startups, envolves daily challenges and many setbacks.
Impact funds, like Venture Capital funds, needaccurace of data to steer the organization in
the right direction. (Westaway K., 2014). Fund´s managers are increasingly looking to create
a social management information system to assist them innot only tracking performance
and impacts but also assessing the relative value of the impacts they generate (BuggLevine, Emerson, 2011). Concerning monitoring, the most commonly used system of
indicators for monitoring impact investments is Impact Reporting and Investments Standards
(IRIS), which provides a catalogue of indicators per sector, proposed by The Global Impact
Investing Network (GIIN). IRIS indicators encompass social, environmental and financial
impacts. Such impact indicators are used for subsidizing the calculation of the Global Impact
Investing Ratings System (GIIRS), one of the most used tools for assessing the generation of
impacts of the companies. As a result, GIIRS provides a rating of the development stage of
each company, which allows it to compare impact results between different companies
(without identifying them) and to follow up the progress of the company itself. The GIIRS
assessment involves 50-120 questions considered by their importance for each sector. The
questions were originally divided into four impact categories (B-Lab, 2011):
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
6
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
i)
ISBN : 9780974211428
Governance - mission and engagement, governance, anticorruption, transparency
and reward policy.
ii)
Workers - benefits, training, participation in decisions and results, flexible work
environment, nondiscrimination policies, policy for hiring third parties and
occupational safety.
iii)
Community - policy for verifying conduct of suppliers concerning social,
environmental and legal requirements, development of local economy, promotion
of diversity(including women, physically-impaired individuals and minorities in
general), support of social action by means of gifts and participation of
employees.
iv)
Environment - policies for reducing environmental impact on raw materials,
purchases, environmental management, recycling, less polluting production,
incentives for employees to use public transportation, reduction of business trips,
environmental standard certificates, reduction of waste and emissions.
Subsequently, another area was created for dealing with impact business models:
v)
Socially & Environmentally Beneficial Business Model - generation of services
and products for the lower socioeconomic classes, incentive for renewable energy,
environmental preservation, and pollution prevention and education.
According to JP Morgan, apudLazzarini,Pongeluppe and Yoong (2013), the impact
investment market has been rapidly growing over the last few years. It is a market with
expected direct investment potential from US$ 400 million to US$ 1 trillion before 2020.
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
7
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
GOVERNMENT
AND
MULTILATERAL
ISBN : 9780974211428
DEVELOPMENT
FINANCIAL
INSTITUTIONS (GMDFI)
GMDFIs play a key role in financially supporting economic and social development, with the
purpose of improving quality of life. Supported interventionsare analyzed for their economic
and financial feasibility, which allows generation of return in order to offset financing, and by
virtue of benefits concerning development.
Such institutions were first created in France in 1852, called banquesd´affaires, aiming at
launching and financing infrastructure projects, businesses and industrial companies, which
needed long-term financing. After World War II, a number ofGMDFIs expanded in order to
encourage development and efforts for economic recovery, among them was the Bank for
Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), which is nowadays a division of the World Bank,
founded in 1944. (ABDE, 1994).These institutions primarily loaned to governments, but they
realized that private companies also needed investment support. The World Bank, founded in
1946, for example, launched International Finance Corporate to invest directly into the
private sector in 1956 (Bugg-Levine, Emerson, 2011).
Over the years, GMDFIs have developed models for formulating, monitoring and assessing
projects. The necessity for this is motivated both by the need for using management
instruments and to report back to stakeholders.
INSTRUMENTS USED BY GMDFIs FOR DESCRIBING THE LOGIC OF
INTERVENTIONS: LOGICAL FRAMEWORK, OUTCOME MAPPING AND
SYNTHESIS MODEL
Theory of Change
In order to monitor projects or programs, it is necessary to know how to keep up with the
progress of interventions by means of indicators. The first step is logically defining the
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
8
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
intervention´s Theory of Change. Interventions are represented in a structure that, from
assessment of cause and effect implications of a problem situation, outlines strategies and
means for changing such situation. (Pfeiffer, P., 2005). The process shows the relation
between activities to be performed, products and services to be delivered and expected
effects, usually represented by figures (Lazzarini, 2013). After definition of the logic of the
desired change, the next step is to identify indicators that allow follow up at each
development stage of the intervention.
Logical Framework Description
Logical Framework (Logframe) is one of the most disseminated instruments for
representing the Theory of Change. It is used for planning, monitoring and assessing
development programs and projects.
The representation of Logframe is linear, from activities necessary for the delivery of
products and services to expected direct and indirect effects. Figure 1 represents the impact
chain from which Logframe is created:
Figure 1, Impact Chain
Logframe represents the impact chain in two categories: a vertical logic and horizontal logic.
Vertical logic clarifies the expected impact chain (Activities, Products and Services
delivered, Direct Effects, Indirect Effects). Horizontal logic describes how each stage of the
impact chain of the project/program will be monitored by means of indicators, with
description of their sources of evidence and external prerequisites for the success of the
intervention. Figure 2 below presents the Logical Framework Matrix.
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
9
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
Figure 2, Logical Framework
Intervention
Logic
Objectively
measurable and
verified Indicators
Source of
verification
Indirect
Effects
Wider problems the project or
program will help to resolve
Ways of measuring the
achievement of indirect
effect
Sources of
information
Direct
Effects
The immediate impact on the
area or target group to be
achieved by the program/project
Ways of measuring the
achievement of direct
effect
Sources of
information
Products
and
Services
Deliverable results expected
form the program/project to
attain the direct effect
Ways of measuring the
services and product
delivery
Sources of
information
Activities
Summary of tasks to deliver the
products and services
Activities’ status
Sources of
information
Important
Assumptions
External factors
necessary to sustain
objectives in the long
run
External actors
necessary if achieved
project/ program
contribute to reaching
the indirect effect
Factors out of
program/project control
which, if present, could
restrict progress from
outputs to direct effects
Factors out of
program/project control
which, if present, could
restrict progress from
activities to achieving
outputs
Logframe and impact investment funds
Logframe is used for defining and detailing activities, products and services delivered and
impacts on the company and social impacts planned by the impact investment funds. It is not
suitable for dealing with changes in the management of the companies supported, an essential
condition for achieving the expected results.
Outcome Mapping Model Description
Outcome Mapping (OM) methodology was proposed in 2001 for filling gaps that existed in
the Logical Framework´s approach. It by highlights the importance of behavior changes of
intermediary agents of financing, who are usually representatives of local governments, for
the success of interventions and sustainability of results. This is the case of support of
GMDFIs support in developing countries, when the sustainability of effects of improved
quality of life are only feasible by means of the participation of local groups: NGOs,
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
10
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
community and others stakeholders(called boundary partners by Outcome Mapping
methodology). (Earl, Carden, Smutylo, 2001).
Other factors that differentiate OM from Logframeare the proposal of a management cycle
(planning, monitoring and assessment) and the relation of contribution of products and
services for the purposes (effects) in a less direct way than in Logical Framework.
The three stages for development of the management cycle are described below:
The first stage of the cycle consists of the Project of Intentions, where intervention is
planned. The first activity of this stage consists of defining the vision, that is, the goal and
effects it intends to achieve as a result of implementation of interventions. Afterwards, there
is definition of the mission, which describes how the program will contribute to the vision.
After definition of the mission, the behavior outcomechallenges are set forth for each
boundary partner. The changes, encouraged by the program, are monitored from the
establishment of logical progress markers. A set of progress markers are defined for each of
the outcome challenges and represent a change model expected for the boundary partner. The
progress markers represent the information that fund’s managers have to gather in order to
monitor the achievement towards the desired outcomes. Progress markers can be considered
as sample indicators ofbehaviour changes.
Figure 3 Example of Progress Markers
Expect to see

L MH
LMH: low , medium , high
Who?
Board of directors have a important role in decision process
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
11
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
Within this phase, a strategic matrix is created with actions planned by GMDFIs for
contributing to changes and results. There are three types of matrix actions: the causal type,
which leads a high probability of produce changes, for instance new equipment delivery. The
second type is the persuasion for change, in which there is description of the support to be
made for training, dissemination of information and planning workshops. The third type is
supporting the sustainability of changes,this includes building of community networks for
exchanging of knowledge and hiring consultants. These purposes are defined for individuals
and groups, as shown below:
Figure 4, Strategy Map
Source: Earl, S., Carden, F., Smutylo, T. (2001).
The last part of the first phase, having defined the goals and how changes will be encouraged,
is to set forth how the organization will internally act for improving its contributions towards
reaching expected results.
The second phase encompasses the structure for monitoring the implementation of strategies
and the progress markers of changes.
The third and final phase is assessment planning. The entire process is depicted below:
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
12
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
Figure 5, Monitoring and Assessment Process
Source: Earl, S., Carden, F., Smutylo, T. (2001).
OM and impact investment funds
The approach of OM, by focusing on the challenges of behavior changes, clearly shows the
importance of the continual influence of the external agents (funds) for the evolution of
partners (companies). The concepts of challenges of changes, progress markers and strategy
maps are major contributers to modelling this typeof intervention. For impact investment
funds, changes are mainly made to the company’s management and capacity. Another
relevant item, arising from the continual effort to stimulate changes, is the description of
activities to establish change strategies.
Synthesis Model
Roduner and Walter Schläppi (2008) proposed a methodological evolution, by joining the
strengths of Logframe and OM methodologies. The Synthesis Model (SM) proposed by them
allows representation of both the evolution of changes in partners and the results provided for
in terms of products and services and their effects. According to the authors, the SM
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
13
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
proposed is only an initial reference for proposals of intervention structuring, that is, an
analysis structure from which a specific solution must be created for each case, depending on
the context.
SM proposed by Roduner, Ambrose (2009) is represented below:
Figure 6, Synthesis Model
Description:

Overall Goal: clear and concrete formulation of the desired impact, it is an overall
goal that must guide interventions.

Direct effects of products and services and behavioral changes (Program Goal): direct
effects expected as a result of projects completion and changes in the partners
behavior.

Challenges of Changes of Partners (Outcome Challenge): the results of the external
agent actions to change organizational practices and structures are formulated for each
partner. For each challenge, qualitative and quantitative indicators are used as gradual
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
14
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
progress markers for each partner in order to allow the monitoring of changes.
Progress markers must be continuously monitored so to detect project deviations and
implement occasional corrections.

Products and Services delivered (Output): deliveries from the contribution as an
external agent. The products and services reflect concrete deliveries, which may be
verified by means of indicators.

Strategy Map: setting out tasks, duties and liabilities to be performed for delivery of
products and services. The definition of the set of strategies to be performed is a result
of the performance planning of the agent. The strategies adopted must be periodically
reviewed for effectiveness, efficiency, and, most of all, their contribution to changes.
Results must be plausibly connected with change challenges.

Mission: it defines the role of change external agent (IFDGs) in relation to partners
and results. It includes the organizational practices of the change agent: internal
strategies of the external agent so that its performance is innovative, creative, efficient
and relevant.
Model for monitoring Impact Funds (MFI)
The purpose of this model is to provide a representative model for the development stages of
the startups supported by impact investment funds, to monitor the actions and results.
Whilst preparing the model proposal, practices and instruments developed by GMDFIs for
monitoring their investments were considered. This decision was deemed relevant because of
the similar goals of the impact investment funds and GMDFIs, since both of them seek to
associate benefits for the society and financial return.
The proposal adjusts the Synthesis Model to the specificities of the impact investments, that
is, changes are made for representing the investment and efforts of management of the funds
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
15
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
for developing the supported countries. The first change is that there is only one “partner” in
this case, which is the invested company, contrary to the Synthesis Model which covers for
many partners.
Furthermore, the challenges of change become the ones that will help the company in a
sustainable way, with management and governance compatible with its growth and increased
capacity. Another fundamental aspect to be considered is that there are two expected effects
of the performance of strategies: financial return and social and environmental impact
(blended value).
Although GRIIS is commonly applied in full four impact categories for assessing results of
the companies supported by the impact investment funds, due to the still incipient state of the
supported companies, the decision was made to only use two categories: “Governance” and
“Business Social and Environmental Impact”. The reason for this choice was that governance
is the initial focus of funds, a consequence of corporate constitution of the company and a
crucial requirement sustainable. Moreover, the “Business Social and Environmental Impact”
category was selected for measuring the social and environmental impact generated by the
companies. Ratifying such simplification, on GIIRS website http://giirs.org/companies/getrated-companies there is a warning that GIIRS methodology may not be suitable for
companies in the initial stage of growth. By adopting GIIRS, even if partially, it is still
possible to compare the stage of supported companies to others of the same sector in the
categories considered.
Changes made in the Synthesis Model are shown in Figure 7.
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
16
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
Figure 7, Model for Monitoring Impact Funds
The two feedback loops show a cyclical management process. If deviations are observed
during monitoring, new strategies are defined for reaching the goals.
Presentation of Hypothetical Case: Total Health company
In order to illustrate the use of the monitoring model proposed for impact investment funds, a
hypothetical case will be used, based on the case of the company Saútil described below
(Lazzarini, Minardi, Pongeluppe, 2013).
The company Total Health offers information about health services. It catalogues the
locations of enrolled users to facilitate their access to health care services, negotiates lower
prices of medicine and provides medical advice. The majority of clients are of C, D and E
socioeconomic classes.
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
17
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
Clients contact of Total Health is made through an online portal. The company is 1 year old
and has 20 permanent employees, on 48 hours per week contracts, and 5 part-time
employees, on 40 hours per week contracts.
For supporting the company, Corpo Capital impact investment fund established a partnership
with the accelerator of companies Acelerasementes, which provides instructions to the
management of Total Heath. Their role is share knowledge and education to startups like a
mini startup MBA. They help to review and to improve the startup´s strategy and to develop
through the help of mentors. The mentors are successful entrepreneurs who specialize in
different fields of expertise. They oversee the balanced scorecard of disciplines needed to
launch a successful business. (Romans, 2013). The Acelerasementesmentors are business
owners and officers with expertise in providing managerial support, discovering new
improvement opportunities, creating business-related opportunities and sharing experience
and information. The purpose of Acelerasementes is, within a short period of time, to prepare
Total Health so that it may reach its economic and social goals, becoming attractive to other
investors.
The business plan approved by the partners set forth the goal of attracting five thousand
clients of C, D and E classes in the following year, of which 1,500 are from socioeconomic
class E (earn of less than $2 per day), with projected revenue of $ 50,000/month and profits
of 20%. For achieving this, it will be necessary to increase the number of workers of Total
Health from 20 to 35 employees, purchase five servers for expansion and contingency and
purchase software for increasing the safety of the online portal.
Methodology Applied to the Case of Total Health
The main change of the Model for Impact Funds for Total Health consists of representing the
existence of two change agents: Corpo Capital and Acelerasementes. As seen, the impact
results obtained through the support of Total Health are measured by means of GIIRS.
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
18
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
Changes made in the Model for Total Health contemplate strategies and actions planned by
Acelerasementes and Corpo Capital and definition of goals for expected effects.
For monitoring corporate advances of “Governance”, indicators are used for measuring the
governance progress, such as: effective performance of the board of directors, awareness of
employees concerning the company’s mission and communication with clients for feedbacks
and complaints. For monitoring “Business Social and Environmental Impact”, the main
indicator is the percentage of clients served receiving less than $2 per day.
Figure 8, Example of Model for Monitoring Impact Funds
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
19
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
The stages from one to five refer to the company Total Heath. Stage 6 is defined for all
companies that are part of the fund’s portfolio.
Description of stages of Figure 8:

Stage 1 - Mission: liabilities of support actions are shared between Acelerasementes
accelerator and Corpo Capital. The mission of each one is stated in the cooperation
agreement, and Acelerasementes has greater input for guiding and monitoring Total
Heath.

Stage 2 - Internal activities of Acelerasementes and Corpo Capital: meetings on the
situation of the company, sector monitoring, performance verification, generation of
ideas and approval of guidelines for new actions in the company.

Stage 3 - Performance strategies: advisory actions, board participation, support
(training, instructions) and definition of projects for achieving the goals of the startup,
please see ‘Planning, Management and Governance’ and ‘Projects’.

Stage 4.a - Planning, Management and Governance: increased management capacity,
whose result is assessed by Governance-GIIRS criteria. Such improvement may result
from the recommendations and the expertise of Acelerasementes´s mentors and of the
managers of Corpo Capital fund, through the creation of an effective board of
directors, hiring of officers and training for increased managerial capacity of current
officers at Total Heath. The progress marker for the board of directors has three
levels: 1) creation of the board of directors, 2) bimonthly meetings of the board and 3)
influence of the board on the company’s strategic decisions.

Stage 4.b - Projects: project results for providing the company with greater productive
capacity and infrastructure. The main projects are the purchase and installation of new
servers, increased security of online portal, training and advertizing campaign for
services offered.
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
20
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference

ISBN : 9780974211428
Stage 5 - Investment in specific purposes, with goals established by investor and
partners, namely:
i.
Financial and economic: financial return of the investment. To achieve revenue of
$ 50,000/month and profits of 20%.
ii.
Social return: measure of effects produced by the company in the target public,
service of 5,000 clients, of which 1,500 present earn less than $ 2 per day.

Stage 6 - Portfolio purposes: financial, social and environmental results of the group
of companies supported by Corpo Capital fund. This stage is not discussed in this
example.
Monitoring procedures of each stage in the case of Total Heath:

In stage 1, the process begins with agreement between Acelerasementes and Corpo
Capital for developing the business potential of Total Health. Acelerasementes plays
the role of mentor to Total Health and continuously monitors the results obtained. The
role of Corpo Capital fund is to cooperate with Acelerasementes and Corpo Capital to
review strategic planning, through the board, and to participate in the preparation of
action strategies with Acelerasementes and the company executive board.

In stage 2, internal activities of agents of the program (Corpo Capital and
Acelerasementes) initiates for defining or reviewing support strategies in order for
Total Health to achieve its goals.

In stage 3, support actions are conducted in relation to each type of strategy (causal,
persuasion and support). Activities to be performed are also set out in detail for
subsequent delivery of products and services and for improved management.

In stage 4, results of the actions performed and defined in the previous stage are
monitored for delivery of products and services (output) and performance of changes
in the company’s management. Monitoring includes the verification of compliance
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
21
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
with physical and financial time schedule of projects being performed until final
delivery of products and services. Among the projects to be implemented in Total
Health there is increased capacity of data processing and storage (acquisition of five
servers), installation of information security software, hiring of consultants and
training for officers.

In stage 5, the results concerning social impacts and economic and financial return are
measured and compared with predetermined goals. The report GIIRS, criteria of
“Business Social and Environmental Impact” measures the impact results. The
analysis of results made in stage 5 generates subsidies for new internal actions and
strategies (Stages 2 and 3).

Stage 6 refers to the monitoring of aggregate results of the investments in all
companies in the portfolio of Investments of Corpo Capital Investment Fund. Its
monitoring is outside the scope of this example.
CONCLUSION
The purpose of the proposal presented in this paper is to provide a management instrument
for impact investment funds, whose characteristics are to set forth goals of financial
performance and generation of social and environmental benefits. The proposed model is
prepared from a combination of two instruments used by IFDGs (Logical Framework and
Outcome Mapping). The purpose is to propose a monitoring model to provide assistance in
the management of investments and in the communication to investors concerning actions
undertaken and results achieved (from internal meetings to define support strategies to
considering social and financial impacts). The model was hypothetically applied in order to
clarify the proposed monitoring process clearer and to facilitate its application to real cases.
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
22
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
The application of the model to real cases will allow the detailed monitoring of the entire
impact chain of investment, stage by stage.
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
23
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
References
ABDE, (1994), Políticas de financiamento de longo prazo, funding e formatação de
instituições financeiras de longo prazo
Addis R., McLeod J., Raine, A. (2013). Impact–Australia Investment for social and economic
benefit, Canberra: Department of Education, Government of Australia
B-Lab. (2011), Global Impact Investing Ratings System (GIIRS), Assessment 101
Bugg-Levine A., Emerson J., (2011), Impact investing : transforming how we make money
while making a diference, Jossey-Bass
Clark, C., Emerson, J., Thornley, B., (2014), The Impact Investor: Lessons in Leadership and
Strategy for Collaborative Capitalism, Jossey-Bass/ Wiley Brand
Earl, S., Carden, F., Smutylo, T. ( 2001). Outcome Mapping, Building learning and reflection
into development programs, International Development Research Center
Kaplan S., Strömberg P., (2001), Venture Capitalists As Principals: Contracting, Screening,
and Monitoring, Steven N, American Economic Review.
Knowton, L., Philips, C. (2009), The logic model logbook, Sage
Lazzarini, S., Minardi, A, Pongeluppe (2013). VOX Capital: Equilibrando Retorno
Financeiro e Social em Investimentos de Impacto (Balancing Financial and Social Return
in ImpactInvestments), Insper
Lazzarini, S., Pongeluppe, L., Yoong, P (2013). Guia para Avaliação de Impacto
Socioambiental para Utilização em Investimentos de Impacto (Guide for Assessing Social
and Environmental Impact for Use in ImpactInvestments), Insper
Mille, P. and Bound K. (2011). The Startup Factories, Nesta
Pfeiffer,
P.
(2005).
Gerenciamento
de
Projetos
de
Desenvolvimento
(ManagingDevelopmentProjects), Brasport
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
24
2015 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference
ISBN : 9780974211428
RIIA - Responsible Investment Association Australasia, (2013), Responsible Investment
Benchmark Report
Roduner, D. Ambrose, K. (2009). A Conceptual Fusion of the Logical Framework Approach
and Outcome Mapping, OM Ideas
Roduner, D., Schläppi, W. (2008). Logical Framework Approach and Outcome Mapping a
Constructive Attempt of Synthesis, Rural Development News
Romans, A. (2013), Entrepreneurial Bible to Venture Capital: Inside Secrets from the
Leaders in the Startup Game, McGraw-Hill
Westaway K., 2014, Profits and purpose: How Social Innovation is Transforming Business
for Good, Wiley Nonprofit Authority
July 1-2, 2015
Cambridge, UK
25