Impact Assessment Accreditation Forum

Strengthening the credibility of impact assessment

A principles-based accreditation framework for impact assessment reports. From instant AI benchmarking to full independent accreditation — helping organisations measure what matters with rigour and honesty.

9
Core PrinciplesFrom purpose clarity to public accountability
4
Accreditation LevelsAI benchmarking through full accreditation
0–10
Scoring RubricTransparent, weighted, principle-by-principle
§8
Section 8 CompanyNot-for-profit, independent, public interest
Most impact assessment reports describe activity, not change. We are building a standard — and a community — that takes impact seriously.
IAAF Founding Principle

Four levels, one standard of rigour

A progressive pathway from instant AI benchmarking to full independent accreditation. Start where you are. Grow as you're ready.

Nine principles for credible assessment

Each principle is a lens, not a checklist item. Together, they define the integrity of an impact assessment process — from design through reporting.

Sample reviews against the Standard

Two real impact assessment reports scored principle by principle — one at 5.8, one at 7.0 — showing how the Standard differentiates quality.

Sample Review 1 · Healthcare
Bansitola PHC Strengthening Initiative
Sanjeevani Industries Foundation + Gramin Health Development Trust · Karamgarh Taluka, Jharkhand. Strong operational results, but ethics gaps block accreditation.
P1 · Purpose & ToC
5.0
P2 · Context
6.5
P3 · Methodology
5.5
P4 · Materiality
5.0
P5 · Evidence
6.0
P6 · Causality
6.5
P7 · Ethics
4.0
P8 · Learning
7.0
P9 · Transparency
7.0
5.8
Weighted Composite Score
Not Accredited — P7 Ethics below floor
Also reviewed
Gram Uday Rural Development Initiative
Apex Engineering India Foundation · Sundarpur, Odisha · Composite 7.0
Key Finding
Rigour and honesty, not perfection

The Bansitola report shows strong healthcare access gains but lacks documented ethical protocols. The Gram Uday report scores higher with a prospective Theory of Change and structured sampling — yet both remain honest about their limits.

The Standard doesn't penalise acknowledged gaps — it surfaces where causal logic, methodology, and ethics need strengthening.

Read both analyses →

Practitioners who built the Standard

IAAF was co-founded by Ruby Thapar and Santhosh Jayaram — decades of experience across corporate, civil society, evaluation, and governance — and is guided by an Advisory Council that includes the architect of India's CSR policy, a member of the IFRS Integrated Reporting Council, and leaders from Wipro, UNDP, and rural development.

Ready to strengthen your impact reporting?

Start with a free benchmarking assessment, or explore the Standard to understand what credible impact assessment requires.