IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/crc/wpaper/1915.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Measuring the Impact of a Social Enterprise – Case Study CONCORDIA Bakery, Romania

Author

Listed:
  • Irina-Sinziana OPINCARU

    (University of Bucharest, Doctoral School of Sociology, Bucharest (Romania))

  • Doina CRANGASU

    (CONCORDIA Humanitarian Organisation, Bucharest (Romania))

Abstract

This paper presents the first impact study of a social enterprise in Romania, conducted on behalf of CONCORDIA Humanitarian Organization (Romania) to measure the effects and impact of the social enterprise CONCORDIA Bakery (developed by CHO) in Romania and to evaluate its contribution to social change. We aim to give accounts on how the interventions of a social enterprise can be assessed and put to use for the benefit of the organization in particular and of the larger environment in general. The purpose of the study was to develop and assess CONCORDIA Bakery’s program and activities, using the theory-based evaluation approach in order to better understand its contribution to improving the lives of its beneficiaries, customers, donors and its shareholder, by 1) showing insights of the main intended and unintended impacts achieved by CONCORDIA Bakery, 2) identifying what makes CONCORDIA Bakery work (or not work) and how it might be replicated, improved, adapted or up-scaled elsewhere, 3) exploring and analysing the changes in the external environment of CONCORDIA Bakery that have influenced its results and impact over time and 4) helping set realistic future objectives for CONCORDIA Bakery. The study covers the period 2011-2017 and it was carried out from 1st of August to 15th of December 2018 by the authors, as external evaluators. The evaluation had a strong exploratory component, since it has been the first time for the enterprise and for a Romanian social enterprise to go through such a process. A mix of quantitative and qualitative methods were used, in order to ensure the triangulation of the data obtained and the consistency of our results and conclusions, taking into account all the relevant perspectives. The methods included: documents analysis, in-depth interviews with relevant stakeholders and participative observation. Findings confirmed that CONCORDIA’s Social Businesses Model focuses on the impact it creates for beneficiaries rather than creating profits. CONCORDIA Bakery’s goal is in line with the agreed social business definition as it targets explicitly an increase of the employability rate of vulnerable young people and provides on-the-job professional training. In addition to the impact created by increasing the employability of vulnerable young people is also considered a therapeutic intervention in order to build responsibility by helping them to gain self-confidence and improve the abilities for an autonomous life.

Suggested Citation

  • Irina-Sinziana OPINCARU & Doina CRANGASU, 2019. "Measuring the Impact of a Social Enterprise – Case Study CONCORDIA Bakery, Romania," CIRIEC Working Papers 1915, CIRIEC - Université de Liège.
    • Handle: RePEc:crc:wpaper:1915
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ciriec.uliege.be/repec/WP19-15.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Howard White, 2009. "Theory-based impact evaluation: principles and practice," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(3), pages 271-284.
    2. White, Howard, 2009. "Theory-Based Impact Evaluation," 3ie Publications 2009-3, International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kabeer, Naila, 2020. "‘Misbehaving’ RCTs: The confounding problem of human agency," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    2. Johnson, Nancy L. & Atherstone, Christine & Grace, Delia, 2015. "The potential of farm-level technologies and practices to contribute to reducing consumer exposure to aflatoxins: A theory of change analysis:," IFPRI discussion papers 1452, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Cornwall, Andrea & Aghajanian, Alia, 2017. "How to Find out What’s Really Going On: Understanding Impact through Participatory Process Evaluation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 173-185.
    4. Naila Kabeer & Munshi Sulaiman, 2015. "Assessing the Impact of Social Mobilization: Nijera Kori and the Construction of Collective Capabilities in Rural Bangladesh," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(1), pages 47-68, February.
    5. Sara Rafael Almeida & Joana Sousa Lourenco & Francois J. Dessart & Emanuele Ciriolo, 2017. "Insights from behavioural sciences to prevent and combat violence against women. Literature review," JRC Research Reports JRC103975, Joint Research Centre.
    6. Quentin Ssossé & Johanna Wagner & Carina Hopper, 2021. "Assessing the Impact of ESD: Methods, Challenges, Results," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-26, March.
    7. Joana Silva Afonso, 2020. "Impact evaluation, social performance assessment and standardisation: reflections from microfinance evaluations in Pakistan and Zimbabwe," Working Papers in Economics & Finance 2020-14, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth Business School, Economics and Finance Subject Group.
    8. Oya, Carlos & Schaefer, Florian & Skalidou, Dafni, 2018. "The effectiveness of agricultural certification in developing countries: A systematic review," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 282-312.
    9. Gwenolé Le Velly & Céline Dutilly, 2016. "Evaluating Payments for Environmental Services: Methodological Challenges," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-20, February.
    10. Calina-Ana Butiu, 2017. "Evidence based practice in academic dropout policy. The pro-integra model," Journal of Community Positive Practices, Catalactica NGO, issue 1, pages 3-12.
    11. Channarith Meng & Wade Pfau, 2012. "Simulating the Impacts of Cash Transfers on Poverty and School Attendance: The Case of Cambodia," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 436-452, December.
    12. Johnson, Nancy L. & Guedenet, Hannah & Saltzman, Amy, 2015. "What will it take for biofortification to have impact on the ground? Theories of change for three crop-country combinations:," IFPRI discussion papers 1427, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    13. Jorge García Hombrados & Maira Devisscher & María Herreros Martínez, 2015. "The Impact of land titling on agricultural production and agricultural investments in Tanzania: a theory-based approach," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(4), pages 530-544, December.
    14. Sarah Bracking, 2012. "How do Investors Value Environmental Harm/Care? Private Equity Funds, Development Finance Institutions and the Partial Financialization of Nature-based Industries," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 271-293, January.
    15. Henrik Hansen & Ole Winckler Andersen & Howard White, 2011. "Impact evaluation of infrastructure interventions," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1-8.
    16. Börner, Jan & Baylis, Kathy & Corbera, Esteve & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Honey-Rosés, Jordi & Persson, U. Martin & Wunder, Sven, 2017. "The Effectiveness of Payments for Environmental Services," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 359-374.
    17. Colin Kirkpatrick, 2012. "Economic Governance: Improving the Economic and Regulatory Environment for Supporting Private Sector Activity," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2012-108, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    18. Jabeen, Sumera, 2016. "Do we really care about unintended outcomes? An analysis of evaluation theory and practice," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 144-154.
    19. Ron Bose, 2010. "CONSORT Extensions for Development Effectiveness: guidelines for the reporting of randomised control trials of social and economic policy interventions in developing countries," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(1), pages 173-186.
    20. Pablo Vidueira & José M. Díaz-Puente & María Rivera, 2014. "Socioeconomic Impact Assessment in Ex Ante Evaluations," Evaluation Review, , vol. 38(4), pages 309-335, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Social enterprise; social economy; social impact; theory-based evaluation; theory of change;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A13 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Social Values
    • L30 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - General
    • L31 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Nonprofit Institutions; NGOs; Social Entrepreneurship
    • L39 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Other
    • O35 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Social Innovation

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:crc:wpaper:1915. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CIRIEC (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ciulgbe.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.