Public sector and non-profit
NGOs
Non-governmental organisations delivering social outcomes.
Health, education, environment and livelihoods organisations are chosen, not sold to. A CSR head placing a mandate, a foundation programme officer, a company screening conservation partners: each of them builds a shortlist before anyone picks up a phone, and each now asks a model first. Most of you already hold the measurement they want. It was written for a donor, not for a machine.
Where the answer is being lost
Your evaluations are real. They are not readable as answers.
A CSR lead with a skilling budget to place types "Which livelihood programmes in India have proven income impact" and reads what comes back. It names four organisations. They are not necessarily the four with the strongest results. They are the four whose income data, sample and follow-up period were written in plain text where a model could reach them. Your placement figures may be better. If they exist only inside a report filed to last year's donor, nothing can cite them, and that budget is placed once a year.
How we win this
The programme for ngos
Start from the evaluations you have
We do not commission new research. First a diagnostic against the questions funders actually type, then we take what your monitoring team has already produced, the baselines, endlines, tracking sheets and evaluation reports, and rewrite that material as dated, attributable, machine-readable text. The work is sized to a communications budget, because in most organisations here that is the only budget it can come from.
Publish the method first
Allocators check how you measured before they look at what you achieved. So the indicator definitions, the sample, the follow-up period, the attrition and the name of whoever ran the evaluation go out as published material in their own right. It is also the safer way to write, because a method can be stated plainly where a result cannot always be claimed.
Answer the partnership questions
Before a funder calls, someone has already asked what a partnership costs, how many districts you could absorb, what reporting arrives and how the money is treated for compliance. Those answers usually sit in a deck that goes out after the meeting. We put one question per page, kept current, so a CSR or grants team can screen you in without meeting you.
Honest about what this cannot do
Committees, relationships and cycles decide money, and no page overturns a decision already taken inside a foundation. The narrower job is real and still worth buying. Be the organisation already read when the list is drawn, correct in every registry a compliance team checks, and tracked with monitoring so you can see the month a peer takes your place in the answer.
The mix that carries it
Authority
Original data and benchmarks
Proprietary numbers, surveys and benchmarks — the most-cited asset class there is, because nobody else has them.
Content
Answer and comparison pages
Cost, process, eligibility and comparison pages built for direct extraction, not for a reader who scrolls.
Content
GEO blogs and authority content
The definitive written answer to the questions your buyers put to an engine, structured so it can be lifted and attributed.
Foundation
Entity and schema engineering
Structured data and entity definition so engines know exactly what you are, where you operate, and what you are credible in.
Authority
Directories and profile consistency
Every listing, registry and profile saying the same thing, so the entity resolves to one business instead of three.
Foundation
Technical fixes
Crawlability, render, speed and the machine-readability faults that keep an engine from reading you at all.
The constraint we work inside
Almost none of this can be paid from a restricted programme grant, so the work is sized to the evidence you already hold rather than to a content calendar. And we publish no promises. With health, with children, with household income, only what was measured gets written down.
Specialisations
4 total
The pitch is different for each one, because the buyer, the trigger and the rules on what may be published are different for each one. Open the one that is yours.
A foundation's grants officer, three weeks from a funding committee, types "How do health NGOs measure and report programme impact" and builds her assessment framework out of the three organisations that answered it.
The question deciding this today
“How do health NGOs measure and report programme impact”
- Who they sell to
- Communities needing better access to care and public health outcomes
- Who signs
- Programme director or communications head
- What starts it
- Grant cycle, programme launch, disease outbreak, impact reporting
- Cost of staying invisible
- Funding lost to organisations that told the story better
Your monitoring function is the strongest thing about you and the least visible. Coverage figures, follow-up rates, the instruments you use, all of it lives in reports written for one donor and circulated as attachments. What a model can reach instead is a large international NGO's published measurement guide, a university evaluation unit and a donor-advisory consultancy. None of them run your programme. All three are shaping how your work will be judged.
What we would run
- 01Technical fixes
We open the evaluation archive. Scanned reports and slide decks become dated pages with a named author, the programme they belong to and the period they cover, crawlable and quotable rather than downloadable.
A grants officer's model cannot cite an attachment it never opens. The same evidence rendered as text becomes retrievable in the fortnight when her assessment framework is being drafted.
- 02Original data and benchmarks
A public methods note for each programme: indicator definitions, catchment and sample, follow-up and loss to follow-up, the instrument used, and who conducted the evaluation. Figures stated only where they were measured.
Funders test method before they trust results. A note that survives that test is what an engine reaches for when asked how health impact is measured.
- 03GEO blogs and authority content
Your monitoring lead writes the definitive account of measuring one specific intervention, signed, dated, and revised when the protocol changes rather than left standing as last year's version.
The question is asked by people designing their own reporting. A practitioner answering it in full becomes the source they cite, and the organisation they remember.
- 04Entity and schema engineering
Entity work binding your organisation, its registrations and approvals, its individual programmes, the districts each one covers and its named authors into a single structure a machine can resolve without guessing.
Models attach claims to entities. Left undefined, your evaluation data reads as generic sector material and the credit lands with whoever defined themselves properly.
What we would not recommend
- Reviews and testimonials. Star ratings attach to clinics and hospitals. A rating profile would file your programme as a care provider, which is not what a grants team is looking for.
- Instagram. Field photography moves individual donors, not a grants committee, and it creates patient consent exposure we would rather not manufacture for a clinical programme.
- Quora. Health questions there attract requests for clinical advice. An organisational account answering them takes on a duty of care it cannot discharge at scale.
What a lead looks like
The call comes from a due-diligence consultant a foundation has hired, not from the foundation itself. He has your methods note open and one instruction: confirm who ran the last evaluation and whether the loss-to-follow-up figure is the published one. He wants that evaluator on a call before the committee papers close.
What we measure
- inclusion in impact-measurement answers
- evaluation archive readable as text
- named author on every claim
- enquiries citing our published method
- share of answer against peer organisations
What changes
The first email changes shape. Instead of a general enquiry about what you do, a partnerships manager writes with your follow-up figures already open and a question about scale. A foundation officer asks whether your instrument could run in a second state. A skilling mission asks for placement data in its own format. Fewer conversations that begin at your mission, more that begin at a number someone has already checked while a budget is still unallocated.
Start here
See who gets named in ngos today
We put your buyers' real questions to the live models and come back with the businesses they name, the sources behind those answers, and the gap between that list and yours.