World | Impact management
Impact management is getting louder, because the world is getting louder
There’s a simple reason impact management is receiving more attention today: the challenges we face are bigger, more interconnected, and the margin for guesswork is smaller. Climate shocks disrupt entire harvests. Inequality narrows opportunity before talent ever gets a chance. Livelihoods depend on increasingly fragile markets. In that context, good intentions are not enough. Scarce impact finance should be directed where it can make the greatest difference, and we must be prepared to change course if evidence proves us wrong.
As Impact Manager at Rabo Foundation, it’s clear to me that impact management is not about proving we were right. It’s about staying honest, especially when results are not what we expected, and getting better at making decisions that matter.
From potential to progress: how we manage impact
Impact management at Rabo Foundation is woven into our daily work. We translate strategy into practical actions and base decisions on relevant impact data, not gut feeling. It starts before we finance. We assess impact potential upfront and ask: who benefits, how meaningful are the intended results, how likely are they to happen, and are we truly additional as a financier?
To make those choices consistently, we use our Potential Impact Performance (PIP) model. It gives us a shared, structured way to judge strategic fit, expected outcomes, and intentionality, particularly when facing higher credit risk and uncertainty. In 2025, we sharpened the model to better reflect today’s pressing challenges. We put greater emphasis on climate resilience and equality — especially for women and youth — because they are essential for improving (rural) livelihoods. That’s why we assess upfront whether an organization is actively addressing these themes and, if not, how we can support them to integrate this over time.
Continuous monitoring, now with smarter tooling
Once finance has been provided, impact management becomes a learning loop. We monitor progress continuously, select indicators that fit each project impact pathway, and use sector standards such as IRIS+ where relevant. The point isn’t to collect data for the sake of it — it’s to understand what the data tells us about progress, gaps, and what to do differently.
In 2025, we started implementing Leonardo: a smarter tool that helps us capture and monitor impact more effectively and see trends over time through real-time insights. Not to generate more dashboards, but to spot patterns earlier, ask better questions, and make adjustments when things aren’t moving as expected.
Beyond the numbers: listening to lived experience
Outputs like jobs created or farmers reached are useful – but not the full story. That’s why we combine quantitative tracking with qualitative insight and stakeholder voice. In 2025, the Cooperative Impact Study, together with 60 Decibels, helped us better understand outcomes such as stability, resilience, and agency from the perspective of the people at the center.
Impact and ESG: different, complementary, both necessary
Finally, we strengthened our ESG approach in 2025, alongside impact. The distinction matters. Impact is about the positive outcomes we intentionally seek to contribute to. ESG is about responsible conduct and managing material environmental, social, and governance risks, so that unintended harm doesn’t undermine those outcomes. They are different and complementary. We need both if we want change that is responsible, credible, and long-lasting.
The world won’t get simpler, so our approach can’t stay static. By combining standards, smarter tools, and lived experience, we’re building an impact practice that helps us steer faster, learn deeper, and contribute to change that lasts.
To learn more about our approach, from our PIP model to continuous monitoring and the Cooperative Impact Study, take a closer look at how we manage and monitor impact in practice.
Key lessons from our impact practice
- Mission-alignment requires evolution
Staying mission‑aligned does not mean keeping impact priorities fixed. For example, as risks and needs shift for agri SMEs and their communities, revisiting our priorities helps ensure our financing addresses today’s most pressing challenges. - Structure supports better judgement
Working across hundreds of organizations in different geographies requires more than individual judgment. Structured decision tools provide consistency and fairness across teams, while still allowing space to reflect local realities and partner diversity. - Focusing on where we add value sharpens our choices
While assessing additionality has long been part of our approach, its importance has grown as impact needs grow and resources remain limited. Being explicit about where we truly add value helps ensure our financing is directed where it can make the greatest difference.