crediblenews

Varun Hiremath on Measuring Social Impact: What Works

admin September 23, 2026

Varun Hiremath on Measuring Social Impact: The Truth About What Actually Works

Varun Hiremath emphasizes that real social impact measurement differs radically from what most organizations report. Measuring activity (how many people touched) feels good but reveals nothing about actual change.

What Most Organizations Measure (And Why It Fails)

Most measure:

Reach: "Served 50,000 beneficiaries"
Cost: "₹50 per person per program"
Inputs: "Conducted 200 training hours"

These metrics feel positive but obscure truth. An organization serving 50,000 people with no behavior change has no impact.

What Varun Hiremath Measures Instead

Real impact measurement:

Behavior change:

Before: Woman doesn't save. After 6 months: Woman saves ₹500 monthly consistently
Metric: Of 100 trained, 62 show sustained behavior change at 6 months

Sustained improvement:

After 12 months: Behavior maintained without active program support
Metric: 62 initial → 50 still saving at 12 months (80% retention)

Income improvement:

Before: No business. After: ₹20,000 monthly business income
Metric: Average income increase ₹12,000 among participants

System change:

Before: 30% of village girls complete 10th grade
After: 70% complete 10th grade
Metric: System transformed (not just individuals helped)

Varun Hiremath's Four-Level Measurement Framework

Individual Level:

Did behavior change?
Did income increase?
Did confidence improve?
Sustained at 6 months? 12 months? 24 months?

Household Level:

Did household income increase?
Did children stay in school longer?
Did health improve?
Did decision-making become more inclusive?

Community Level:

Did cultural norms shift?
Did economic activity increase?
Did community institutions strengthen?
Did local leadership emerge?

System Level:

Did policies change?
Did government investment increase?
Did market conditions improve?
Did new institutions form?

Varun Hiremath's Real Example: School Intervention Measurement

Most reports: "Opened school, trained 20 teachers, ₹50 lakhs invested, 400 students enrolled."

Real measurement (Varun Hiremath's approach):

Individual level:

Baseline: 30% of children attend school
Year 1: 60% attend
Year 2: 55% (retention problem identified, targeted intervention)
Year 3: 70% attend, 85% of those who started complete year
Disaggregated: Girls 75%, boys 65%

Household level:

Families with school-going children: 25% higher income (mothers able to work)
Girls' marriage: 3-year delay (education changes narrative)
Health: Increased spending (school teaches hygiene)

Community level:

Norm shift: "Girls will go to school" (from "girls don't need")
Jobs created: 8 (teachers, admin)
Community contribution: ₹2 lakhs annually to school maintenance
Local businesses: 3 education-related businesses started

System level:

Government funding increased for education block
District replicating model in 10 villages
Staff allocation changed based on learning
Policy priorities shifted

This real measurement reveals actual impact.

The Measurement Challenges Varun Hiremath Acknowledges

Long timelines: Real change takes years, but funding cycles are annual
Attribution: Did your program cause change or other factors?
Cost: Rigorous measurement is expensive; pressure to spend on programs
Uncomfortable truths: Rigorous measurement reveals failures; pressure to hide

Solutions Varun Hiremath Implements:

Long timelines → Measure both early process indicators AND delayed outcomes
Attribution → Use comparison groups where possible, track multiple factors, be honest about limits
Cost → Partner for evaluation, use technology, integrate measurement into program
Uncomfortable truths → Build culture celebrating learning from failure

What Good Impact Measurement Requires

Baseline data: Understand starting point before program
Comparison group: Know what would happen without intervention
Long-term tracking: Measure sustained change (not one-time results)
Qualitative + quantitative: Numbers tell one story, detailed stories tell another
Disaggregated data: By gender, caste, income, geography (not just aggregate)
External verification: Independent assessment, not self-evaluation
Failure documentation: Track what didn't work, learn from it

Why Varun Hiremath Emphasizes Failing Openly

Most organizations hide failures to appear successful. Varun Hiremath does opposite:

Program X: 45% showed improvement, 25% mixed results, 30% no change

Why did 30% show no change?

Participants lacked time (work obligations)
Content irrelevant to context
Facilitators lacked skill
Expectation mismatch

Learning for next iteration:

Adjust timing
Make content contextual
Improve facilitator training
Set realistic expectations

Failure becomes learning opportunity.

Varun Hiremath's Measurement Tools

Simple tools (low cost):

Paper tracking forms
SMS surveys for follow-up
WhatsApp feedback
Monthly group self-evaluation

Technology tools (medium cost):

Mobile apps for data collection
Google Forms for surveys
Spreadsheets for analysis
Visualization tools

Rigorous tools (high cost):

Randomized controlled trials
Baseline/endline evaluations
External evaluators
Longitudinal tracking

Varun Hiremath's Recommendations to Organizations

Stop measuring reach. Measure impact. Not: "Trained 1,000 women" But: "500 showed behavior change, 350 sustained at 6 months"
Measure over time. Not: "Program succeeded" But: "70% sustained behavior change 12 months after program"
Track failures. Not: "100% success rate" But: "60% showed improvement, 25% mixed, 15% no change. Here's why."
Disaggregate data. Not: "Average impact per person" But: "Women benefited 40% more than men. Poorest 60% more than others."
Invest in measurement. Allocate 10-15% of budget to rigorous measurement. It's learning, not waste.