I'm not sure there isn't anything that can't be funded by this type of model. I know that differs from what the previous presenter talked about.
The reason is that I don't think we're being creative enough in measuring the impact on the issues. If we get creative—and I think that's one of the exciting possibilities here—you could probably measure impact on just about anything you do.
The example you might use.... My organization is focusing on the justice response, and recidivism as the big social impact we measure. But I think it's more important to measure what is happening to the children in those homes and their graduation rates from school, because we know that the social determinants of criminality are often related to education and the ability of kids to have an education and get a job. We also know quite clearly from the social literature that kids who grow up in homes where there is domestic violence tend not to have the same social outcomes when it comes to their long-term development.
It's a matter of creatively thinking about how we measure a social issue and what impact we are trying to achieve. If we can link those, you can measure, but it does require creative thinking.
At this stage I think there are some things where you're looking more at structural or infrastructure issues that an organization may not have the capacity to measure. They don't have the research capacities or the evaluation capacities, or they may not have the support of local government or their ministries that may be tracking some of those larger pieces of data that they would need to demonstrate their social models. Those are probably more the limitations than the actual ability to measure something.
We just need to wrap our heads around how creative we want to be.