BigCat Research

CSR project examples with measured impact

Short answer: The CSR project examples worth studying are the ones that publish how impact was measured, not only how many people took part. Below are six published evaluations of five programmes in Türkiye: four report an SROI ratio (between about 2 and 3.53 per unit invested), one a pre-test/post-test gain of 9% in financial competency, and one a four-year participant survey. Read each figure with its method, sample and period, because a ratio on its own tells you little.

Disclosure: BigCat Research sells social impact analysis and SROI measurement services, and we worked on every project in the main table. That is why we know them, and also why you should check the original public sources linked in each row rather than take our word for it.

What makes a CSR project example "measured"?

Most lists of social responsibility project examples describe activities: a school built, trees planted, a number of people trained. That is output. A measured project goes one step further and says what changed for the people involved, how that change was observed, and how much of it the project can claim.

The Principles of Social Value, maintained by Social Value International, set a useful bar here. Two of the eight principles matter most when you read someone else's results: "Do not overclaim", which asks you to claim only the value the activities are responsible for creating, and "Verify the result", which says independent assurance is needed when results are reported externally or used for major decisions.¹ Keep both in mind as you read the examples.

Six measured results from five CSR programmes in Türkiye

My Sister (Kız Kardeşim): an SROI with a stated sampling method

The My Sister project is run by TOBB, Habitat Association and Coca-Cola Türkiye. Its 2021 social impact analysis, prepared by BigCat Research, states its steps: identify the target group, build theories of change, run surveys, estimate impacts, then calculate SROI values.² Participants were chosen through maximum variation sampling, and the report shows 566 respondents.² It concludes that each 1 TL invested produced 2.44 TL of social return.²

Two other figures in the same report are easier to picture. 80% of participants who received grants in 2021 saw their sales increase, and among women's cooperative training participants, 27% reported higher sales.² The report also sets out the standard SROI adjustment, with net impact calculated after deadweight, attribution and displacement are taken into account.²

A separate four-year evaluation, also prepared by BigCat Research, surveyed 525 people who attended training between 2018 and 2021. It found that 37% own a business, 17% increased their staff numbers, 84% were satisfied with the training content and 85% with the trainers.⁹

What it does not tell you: neither report describes a comparison group of women who did not take part. The figures are participants' own reports, so they show change among participants, not proof that the training caused all of it.

Resilience Dynamics: an SROI broken down by activity

This project worked with Syrian refugee women and host-community women in Istanbul and İzmir from 1 April 2020 to 31 March 2021. It was funded by the Government of Japan and implemented by UN Women in partnership with Habitat Association.³ In total 1,519 people took part.³

The SROI report does not stop at one number. The overall ratio is 2.57 TL per 1 TL invested, but the Second Chance Education Programme came out at 2.67 and the Peace and Dialogue Building Programme at 2.35.³ The highest ratio in the project, 3.19, was in the art workshops for social cohesion.³ BigCat Research ran the survey (112 respondents) and the focus groups (38 participants), in Turkish and Arabic.³

Two softer findings sit beside the ratio: 78% of career training participants said it was their first certified training, and 63% of host-community women said their view of refugees had changed.³

What it does not tell you: the report applies those survey percentages to the full target group (for example, 78% becomes 1,185 people).³ That is a projection from 112 respondents chosen for variety, not for statistical representativeness, and a careful reader should treat it as an estimate.

Women's cooperatives: a social return reported in a press release

In the women's cooperatives strand of I Can Manage My Money, funded by Visa and run by UNDP with Habitat Association, 14 cooperatives received digitalisation support in the first year.⁴ UNDP's press release of 7 June 2022 reports that 86% increased their sales and 93% formed new partnerships; within a year 76% were doing e-commerce, 71% had diversified sales channels and 47% were targeting exports.⁴ The same release says every lira invested returned twice its value in social terms, according to an analysis by BigCat Research.⁴ Turkish press coverage reported the same sales and partnership figures and that the programme was expanding to 26 cooperatives from 19 provinces.⁵

What it does not tell you: a press release has no room for the method. If you want to reuse this example in your own reporting, ask the programme for the full report before quoting the ratio.

Entrepreneurship Pioneers: two ratios from two periods

Entrepreneurship Pioneers is a women's entrepreneurship programme run by Alarko Holding and Habitat Association. Press coverage in January 2025 reported that the social impact reports for its first two years put its SROI at 2.77, with 1,700 women entrepreneurs trained across 220 hours by then.⁶ In March 2026 the programme reported that more than 4,000 women from 81 provinces had attended over three years, 40 ventures had received grants, and an analysis of income growth, job creation capacity, digital skill gains and ecosystem positioning found 3.53 units of social value per unit invested.⁷

This is the clearest example of why a rising ratio needs a second look. The two figures cover different periods and a much larger group of participants. The guide to SROI states that comparing social return ratios alone is not appropriate, and that an organisation should compare its own ratio over time and examine the reasons for changes.¹⁰

What it does not tell you: the press articles do not name the analyst or describe deadweight and attribution assumptions. Our project page lists our role; the published reports are the place to check the method.

Money-Managing Farmers: no ratio, and that is fine

Not every measured CSR project needs a money figure. FODER's 2025 evaluation of financial literacy training for tobacco farmers, run with Socotab Yaprak Tütün A.Ş. and supported by Imperial Brands PLC, used a pre-test and post-test.⁸ Training reached 1,188 farmers in İzmir, Balıkesir, Manisa, Uşak, Denizli and Aydın, up from 348 in 2024.⁸ The impact analysis is based on pre-test and post-test results from 483 participants, using six questions adapted from the OECD/INFE financial knowledge scale.⁸

Average financial competency rose by 9%. The largest gains were in separating farm and household budgets (18%), knowing how to protect against inflation (15%) and knowledge of investment products (13%). Among women, correct answers on inflation rose from 27% to 57%.⁸ The report also shows a weak spot: compound interest stayed low, rising only from 31% to 35%.⁸ BigCat Research prepared the report's interactive dashboard.⁸

What it does not tell you: a pre/post test shows knowledge change in the short term. It does not show whether farmers changed how they borrow or save later on. BigCat Research's 2026 monitoring continues to follow learning, awareness and behaviour change in the programme.

Two published ratios you cannot check

Some CSR figures circulate with no method attached. For Coders of Tomorrow (Yarını Kodlayanlar), the Vodafone Turkey Foundation's coding programme with Habitat Association, a 2020 news report said the project's 2019-2020 social impact report found 6.6 million TL of social value over the previous year and 4.4 TL of social return per 1 TL invested.¹¹ For Green Planet (Yeşil Gezegen), a 2024 local news article said each 1 lira invested produced 5.6 lira of value, citing only the foundation's statement.¹² Neither article names who did the analysis or how. BigCat Research has also worked on both programmes (Coders of Tomorrow in 2024, Green Planet in 2023), but neither article attributes these figures to us, and we cannot confirm their method from the public sources.

They are higher than the ratios in the table above. That does not mean the projects were better. Without the stakeholders, proxies and deductions, there is nothing to compare.

How to use these examples in your own CSR plan

Pick the example closest to your own programme and copy its measurement design, not its headline. In practice:

• Training with a short horizon: a pre-test/post-test on a validated scale, as in Money-Managing Farmers, is often enough and cheaper than SROI.
• Grant or entrepreneurship programmes: follow sales, staff and survival over several years, as the My Sister four-year evaluation did. Our grant programme evaluation page describes this kind of study.
• Programmes where the board wants a money figure: an SROI, broken down by activity and stakeholder group like Resilience Dynamics, with deductions stated.

To see how deadweight and attribution move a ratio, try our SROI calculator; its numbers are illustrative only. If you are writing a brief, the guide to commissioning a social impact assessment or SROI lists what to ask for, and SROI vs cost-benefit analysis helps if finance prefers a different method. All our project records are on the projects page, and more method notes are in our guides.

FAQ

1. What is a good SROI ratio for a CSR project? There is no benchmark you can rely on. The guide to SROI says comparing ratios alone between organisations is not appropriate, because each analysis rests on different stakeholders and judgements.¹⁰ The five published SROI figures for programmes in Türkiye reviewed in this guide range from about 2 to 3.53, but that range describes those reports, not a target.

2. Do CSR project examples need an SROI to count as measured? No. The Money-Managing Farmers evaluation reports a 9% average gain in financial competency from a pre-test/post-test with 483 participants and no money ratio at all.⁸ A clear method and an honest sample matter more than the format.

3. Why did Entrepreneurship Pioneers report two different SROI figures? Entrepreneurship Pioneers, Alarko Holding and Habitat Association's women's entrepreneurship programme, reported 2.77 from its first two years' reports and 3.53 from an analysis after three years with far more participants.⁶⁷ Different periods and samples produce different ratios; the useful question is what explains the change.

4. How can I check whether a published CSR impact figure is reliable? Look for the method, the sample size, the period and the deductions (deadweight, attribution, displacement). Social Value International also says results used externally or for major decisions should be independently assured.¹ A figure that appears only in a press article, such as a 2024 local news report of 5.6 lira of value per lira for the Green Planet programme, cannot be checked.¹²

5. Can we cite published CSR impact figures in our own sustainability report? Yes, if you cite the original published source, quote each figure with its period, sample and method, and link the original report rather than a secondary summary.

Sources

Author: BigCat Research team. Last reviewed: 15 October 2026.