I would definitely see it as a positive. I think the service providers in a model like this would maybe be forced to develop better performance measurement, performance metrics, and to transparently report back to the public, or to have measured by an independent evaluator, what their rate of success has been, what they've actually accomplished.
What I would say, too, is that social impact bonds are also meant to be proactive interventions. For example, you can look at the rate of recidivism, which is a pretty clear metric, but you can go back into the system and look at, for example, the contributors to a lower rate of recidivism. Perhaps we would start looking at the level of education or the number of graduates of the education system within the corrections system as a positive indicator and a positive contributor to a lower rate of recidivism. Elements like that could be a very powerful tool in creating the social objective you're aiming for. So I would agree.