SROI impact mapping worksheet

Complete this with stakeholders where possible. Financial proxies can be changed later, but identifying outcomes and collecting evidence are fundamental to analytical credibility.

When to use this worksheet and what completion involves Fictional completed example

EvalCompass Worksheet

SROI impact mapping worksheet

Method: Social Return on Investment

Complete this with stakeholders where possible. Financial proxies can be changed later, but identifying outcomes and collecting evidence are fundamental to analytical credibility.

Basic information

Define the analysis scope.

Completed example for this section (fictional)

This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.

Program or organization name: Consultation support (fictional)
Period analyzed: The same period within 1 year
Main stakeholders: Service users, staff and referral destinations
Total input cost in yen: JPY 100,000 (fictional)
Discount rate (%): 0% in this formula illustration. Check the applicable period and rate in a real analysis.
Analyst and date: Staff member A / July 2026 (fictional)

Reason for this entry: Check non-cash resource inputs in an actual analysis.

Program or organization name

Period analyzed

Main stakeholders

Total input cost in yen

Discount rate (%)

Analyst and date

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

Define the analysis scope.

Check non-cash resource inputs in an actual analysis.

View the method explanation

Writing tips

Follow each field’s heading to record the program name, focus, period, and other details. Leave undecided matters clearly marked as unresolved.

Read the full fictional example

Impact map

Use one row per stakeholder. Specify whose change each outcome represents and what changed.

Completed example for this section (fictional)

This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Stakeholder	Inputs: resources	Activities and outputs	Outcome: change experienced	Measurement indicator	Data collection method
Service users	Participation time, valued as an input in an actual analysis	Consultations for 20 people (fictional)	Completed necessary applications	Confirmation of application completion	Plan consent and record matching.

Reason for this entry: Do not count the same outcome twice across stakeholders.

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Stakeholder	Inputs: resources	Activities and outputs	Outcome: change experienced	Measurement indicator	Data collection method

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

Use one row per stakeholder. Specify whose change each outcome represents and what changed.

Do not count the same outcome twice across stakeholders.

View the method explanation

Writing tips

Keep the information in each row aligned. Scroll wide tables horizontally to see every column.

Read the full fictional example

Financial proxies and social value calculations

Record appropriate financial proxies and evidence for each outcome. Examine differences among candidates and effects of alternative values.

Completed example for this section (fictional)

This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Outcomes	Financial proxy	Monetary unit value in yen	Quantity	Social value subtotal in yen	Source and evidence
Fictional value of application completion	Assumed illustrative unit value	12,500	20 people	250,000	Not observed or a market price. Validate valuation in an actual analysis.

Reason for this entry: Do not present provisional proxies as verified financial data.

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Outcomes	Financial proxy	Monetary unit value in yen	Quantity	Social value subtotal in yen	Source and evidence

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

Record appropriate financial proxies and evidence for each outcome. Examine differences among candidates and effects of alternative values.

Do not present provisional proxies as verified financial data.

View the method explanation

Writing tips

Keep the information in each row aligned. Scroll wide tables horizontally to see every column.

Read the full fictional example

Impact adjustment

Record estimates and evidence for the four elements. If none is available, explicitly write “No basis for estimate.”

Completed example for this section (fictional)

This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Outcomes	Deadweight (%)	Attribution: contribution of others or other factors (%)	Drop-off (% per year)	Displacement (%)	Adjusted value in yen	Basis for estimate
Application completion	20	25: attribution to others	Not applicable because periods after the covered period are not evaluated	Assume 0	150,000	All adjustment values illustrate the formula and are not established ratios.

Reason for this entry: Specify the direction of attribution and period for applying drop-off.

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Outcomes	Deadweight (%)	Attribution: contribution of others or other factors (%)	Drop-off (% per year)	Displacement (%)	Adjusted value in yen	Basis for estimate

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

Record estimates and evidence for the four elements. If none is available, explicitly write “No basis for estimate.”

Specify the direction of attribution and period for applying drop-off.

View the method explanation

Writing tips

Keep the information in each row aligned. Scroll wide tables horizontally to see every column.

Read the full fictional example

Sensitivity analysis notes

Record parameters with the greatest influence on SROI and the range of changes in the ratio when values vary.

Completed example for this section (fictional)

This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.

If total proxy value is JPY 200,000, adjusted value is JPY 120,000 and gross SROI is 1.2. At 40% deadweight, JPY 250,000 × 0.6 × 0.75 = JPY 112,500, giving gross SROI of 1.125.

Reason for this entry: Prioritize checking the most influential assumptions.

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

Record parameters with the greatest influence on SROI and the range of changes in the ratio when values vary.

Prioritize checking the most influential assumptions.

View the method explanation

Writing tips

Use the example as a reference and record what you have established about your own program. Distinguish assumptions and unchecked matters from confirmed facts.

Read the full fictional example

Completion check

Completed example for this section (fictional)

This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.

☐ Not checked: Beneficiaries, the most important stakeholders, participated in impact mapping
☐ Not checked: Recorded proxy suitability, selection rationale and sources
☑ Checked: Showed comparison information and evidence for deadweight estimates, explicitly identifying assumptions or unknowns
☑ Checked: Documented evidence for attribution, drop-off and displacement estimates
☑ Checked: Recorded how SROI and judgments change in sensitivity analysis
☑ Checked: Disclosed all assumptions and adjustment values in the report

Reason for this entry: Stakeholder participation and proxy validation are incomplete. This illustrative example explicitly identifies all adjustments as assumptions and discloses formulas and sensitivity.

Beneficiaries, the most important stakeholders, participated in impact mapping
Recorded proxy suitability, selection rationale and sources
Showed comparison information and evidence for deadweight estimates, explicitly identifying assumptions or unknowns
Documented evidence for attribution, drop-off and displacement estimates
Recorded how SROI and judgments change in sensitivity analysis
Disclosed all assumptions and adjustment values in the report

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

Stakeholder participation and proxy validation are incomplete. This illustrative example explicitly identifies all adjustments as assumptions and discloses formulas and sensitivity.

View the method explanation

Writing tips

Read each item and check those you have confirmed. Do not use the fictional example’s checkbox states as findings about your own program.

Read the full fictional example

Before writing, check when to use the worksheet and what completion involves

SROI impact mapping worksheet is a worksheet for applying Social Return on Investment in meetings or individual work. For the overall duration of the method, use “Planning example, not a universal standard duration: 3–6 months, including stakeholder consultation, impact mapping and financial proxy research” as a reference, adjusting for scale and resources. Fill in what you know provisionally and leave unresolved matters as questions to check next.

When this worksheet is useful

When nonprofits, social enterprises or cooperatives want to demonstrate their program's social value to investors, government and society for accountability
When quantifying social returns to inform investment decisions in impact investing or social impact bonds (SIBs)
When comparing proposals for public procurement or subsidies in terms of social value

Participants and preparation

People experiencing change, program staff, people familiar with costs and analysts. Include the necessary perspectives and do not judge consultation quality solely by participant numbers.

Bring the materials used for decisions, existing data, and differing stakeholder views to help complete the worksheet.

Suggested order

1. Basic informationDefine the analysis scope.
2. Impact mapUse one row per stakeholder. Specify whose change each outcome represents and what changed.
3. Financial proxies and social value calculationsRecord appropriate financial proxies and evidence for each outcome. Examine differences among candidates and effects of alternative values.
4. Impact adjustmentRecord estimates and evidence for the four elements. If none is available, explicitly write “No basis for estimate.”
5. Sensitivity analysis notesRecord parameters with the greatest influence on SROI and the range of changes in the ratio when values vary.
6. Completion check

Signs the worksheet is ready for review

Impact map listing outcomes by stakeholder
Evidence supporting financial proxy selection
Impact adjustment worksheet for deadweight, attribution, drop-off and displacement

Cautions for review

Do not select only proxies that inflate the ratio. Show meaning for stakeholders, suitability, alternative values and sensitivity analysis.
Analysts developing an impact map without stakeholder input omit the most important beneficiaries' perspectives and produce a model detached from reality.
Do not assume 0% deadweight without evidence. Consider comparison information and stakeholders' evidence, but do not transfer estimates from other programs without checking conditions.

Guides to read before starting

Read a completed fictional example (your entries will not change)

Fictional example; not actual results

A fictional illustrative example with inputs of JPY 100,000, pre-adjustment value of JPY 250,000, deadweight of 20%, attribution to others of 25%, and displacement of 0%. Discounting is omitted because values concern the same period.

Basic information

Program or organization name: Consultation support (fictional)
Period analyzed: The same period within 1 year
Main stakeholders: Service users, staff and referral destinations
Total input cost in yen: JPY 100,000 (fictional)
Discount rate (%): 0% in this formula illustration. Check the applicable period and rate in a real analysis.
Analyst and date: Staff member A / July 2026 (fictional)

Reason for this entry: Check non-cash resource inputs in an actual analysis.

Impact map

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Stakeholder	Inputs: resources	Activities and outputs	Outcome: change experienced	Measurement indicator	Data collection method
Service users	Participation time, valued as an input in an actual analysis	Consultations for 20 people (fictional)	Completed necessary applications	Confirmation of application completion	Plan consent and record matching.

Reason for this entry: Do not count the same outcome twice across stakeholders.

Financial proxies and social value calculations

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Outcomes	Financial proxy	Monetary unit value in yen	Quantity	Social value subtotal in yen	Source and evidence
Fictional value of application completion	Assumed illustrative unit value	12,500	20 people	250,000	Not observed or a market price. Validate valuation in an actual analysis.

Reason for this entry: Do not present provisional proxies as verified financial data.

Impact adjustment

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Outcomes	Deadweight (%)	Attribution: contribution of others or other factors (%)	Drop-off (% per year)	Displacement (%)	Adjusted value in yen	Basis for estimate
Application completion	20	25: attribution to others	Not applicable because periods after the covered period are not evaluated	Assume 0	150,000	All adjustment values illustrate the formula and are not established ratios.

Reason for this entry: Specify the direction of attribution and period for applying drop-off.

Sensitivity analysis notes

If total proxy value is JPY 200,000, adjusted value is JPY 120,000 and gross SROI is 1.2. At 40% deadweight, JPY 250,000 × 0.6 × 0.75 = JPY 112,500, giving gross SROI of 1.125.

Reason for this entry: Prioritize checking the most influential assumptions.

Completion check

☐ Not checked: Beneficiaries, the most important stakeholders, participated in impact mapping
☐ Not checked: Recorded proxy suitability, selection rationale and sources
☑ Checked: Showed comparison information and evidence for deadweight estimates, explicitly identifying assumptions or unknowns
☑ Checked: Documented evidence for attribution, drop-off and displacement estimates
☑ Checked: Recorded how SROI and judgments change in sensitivity analysis
☑ Checked: Disclosed all assumptions and adjustment values in the report

Common errors in judgment

Treating 25% attribution as the organization's own contribution and multiplying directly by 25%

How to revise: Define whether the proportion concerns others or your own organization before using it in the formula.

Reason: Reversing the meaning of attribution changes the calculated result.

Assigning a high unit value to a sense of security to inflate the ratio

How to revise: Select evidence-based proxies comparable to value experienced by stakeholders.

Reason: Setting the ratio first leads to overstatement of value.

Editorial and checking information

Content updated: 2026-10-07Source checked: 2026-10-07 (includes AI cross-checking)No documented human reviewIncludes fictional examplesEditorial policy and scope of checking Cite this page Report a correction

References and checked sections

A guide to Social Return on Investment
Jeremy Nicholls, Eilis Lawlor, Eva Neitzert and Tim Goodspeed / The SROI Network · 2012
Section consulted
Stage 4: Establishing impact / 5.3 Calculating the ratio / 5.4 Sensitivity analysis
How it relates to the text
Distinguish gross from net SROI, and test sensitivity to deadweight, attribution to others and proxies.
Source checked: 2026-09-13 (includes AI cross-checking)
Standards for Applying the Principles of Social Value: The Complete Set
Social Value International · 2026
Section consulted
Section Three p.30: SROI reports / social impact reports; Reporting Standard Part B p.33 items 8, 8.1–8.2 / Appendix 3 p.37: optional ratio disclosure, range, sensitivity and assumptions
How it relates to the text
SROI ratios are not required throughout social value measurement and management. SVI2026 distinguishes SROI reporting with a ratio from broader social impact reporting without a mandatory ratio. The organizational Reporting Standard Part B makes SROI ratio disclosure optional. When reporting a ratio, explain sensitivity analysis, calculation assumptions and judgments, and the ratio as a range.
Source checked: 2026-10-07 (includes AI cross-checking)

How to cite this page

EvalCompass Editorial Team. “SROI impact mapping worksheet”. EvalCompass, updated 2026-10-07. https://evalcompass.jun-nakatani.com/en/worksheets/sroi/

Add the date you accessed the page. Text created by this site is available under CC BY 4.0. Quotations, external materials, and bundled fonts have their own terms of use. When reusing content, credit the source, link to the license, and indicate any changes.

Suggest a correction or improvement to this page

Change history

2026-09-13 — Checked sources for definitions and applicability conditions, and added fictional examples, reasons for judgments and examples for every worksheet field. Revised unverified claims about history and adoption. Also reviewed existing procedures and cautions, and adjusted fixed participant counts and thresholds and generalizations about institutions. Preserved field positions, types and counts while revising fixed conditions and thresholds in the forms.
2026-10-07 — Added SVI2026 Reporting Standard pp.33 and 37. Clarified ratios' optional status in broader social value measurement and sensitivity, assumptions and ranges when ratios are reported. Preserved the SROI definition and formulas, 2012 guide, worksheet and examples.
2026-10-07 — Correction based on independent content review (content-check-causal). Clarified SVI2026 p.30's distinction between SROI reporting and broader social impact reporting, and the scope of optional disclosures in Reporting Standard Part B.