Reports Database:
The Social Value of CRECE – An SROI Evaluation Report

SUMMARY

This report evaluates the impact of the Project CRECE: Promoting the capabilities, competencies, and empowerment of people for the prevention of institutionalization and deinstitutionalization, through the SROI (Social Return on Investment) methodology. This methodology allows the social value generated by the intervention to be quantified in economic terms, providing a comprehensive vision of the impacts generated on the participating people and other stakeholders.

The CRECE Project was promoted by the Red Cross and financed by the Ministry of Social Rights, Consumption and Agenda 2030 within the Recovery, Transformation and Resilience Plan, which channels resources from the Next Generation EU Recovery Funds. It had a budget of 16.121.556,13€, and its implementation spread across 16 provinces in 53 locations in Spain, lasting 36 months (2022-2024).

During its development, the main objective of the project was to contribute to the reduction of vulnerability factors that could accelerate the institutionalization of the participating people and favor the development of public policies on deinstitutionalization and/or prevention of institutionalization. To this end, many community actions were carried out, among others, promoting collaboration with 331 entities in different locations. The intervention involved 3,707 people, of which 2,755 were women (74.93%) and 952 men (25.07%).

The calculation of the Social Return on Investment (SROI) carried out for the CRECE project shows a significant impact on the generation of social value, showing that for every euro invested, the program generates an estimated return between 3,00€ and 7,77€.

For each 1€ invested, social value is generated between 3,00€ and 7,77€

This range is established based on different levels of reliability and coverage, allowing decisions to be adjusted according to the degree of risk that one wants to assume in each decision, since the range shows data from a ratio that only includes data from a representative sample to a ratio that takes into account groups with a sample that presents a low degree of sampling error, but exists, so there is a certain risk that it does not completely reflect the voice of the entire group of interest.

The conservative ratio (3,00€), based solely on representative data, reflects the value generated with a representative sample, extrapolated to the groups with said sample, thus minimizing the risk of overestimating the impact. On the other hand, the inclusive ratio with moderate risk (7,77€) incorporates data from a significant group of participating people whose statistical representativeness presents an acceptable margin of error (6.81%), which broadens the vision of the social impact generated, although with a small degree of uncertainty.

In economic terms, the Net Present Value (NPV) of the social impact generated by CRECE in a conservative scenario is 13.958.568€, which corresponds to 3 times more value generated than the value invested (resources).

The analysis of the distribution of social value shows that 99.49% of the impact generated falls directly on the participating people, underlining the relevance of CRECE in improving their well-being. The changes most valued by the participants are directly related to their emotional well-being and social integration, highlighting the increase in support network, improvement in mental health, reduction in feelings of loneliness, and strengthening of the sense of belonging to the community.

These results reinforce CRECE’s focus on preventing institutionalization by reducing vulnerability factors that could accelerate the institutionalization of participating individuals. In particular, the social value generated exclusively by the reduced feeling of loneliness (6.812.591€) is almost equivalent to the total investment of the project, which demonstrates the sustainability and social profitability of CRECE, even if only this impact were considered.

The comparison between these changes highlights that the increase in the support network is the most valuable impact, surpassing the reduction of the feeling of loneliness by 36.53% and the strengthening of the sense of community belonging by 41.93%, which reaffirms the key role of social networks in mitigating social vulnerability.

Furthermore, people participating in the CRECE project have experienced significant improvements in other aspects of their well-being as a result of their participation, to which they assign a high value for the well-being of the group evaluated. An increase in economic and housing satisfaction was observed, reflecting greater stability in these areas for the people who were supported, reducing their degree of vulnerability. Likewise, some have initiated new studies with greater motivation, indicating a positive impact on their personal development. There has also been a recorded reduction in feelings of anxiety and/or depression, along with an increased feeling of tranquility, reinforcing the importance of intervention in improving emotional well-being.

Furthermore, they have identified an increase in the appreciation for life and a greater perception that the activities they carry out have meaning and value. As reported by the participants, physical and mental health have improved, and many have expressed a greater care for their mental health. However, there has also been observed increased concern and uncertainty about the continuity of the project, which highlights the need to consider strategies to guarantee its sustainability over time.

The report concludes with a series of strategic recommendations for future interventions, among which is the need to extend the duration of the program, optimize strategies to reduce negative impacts, strengthen community networks, and perform longitudinal monitoring that allows evaluating the effectiveness of CRECE in preventing institutionalization.

Finally, the information collected in this report not only allows us to understand the social value generated by CRECE, but also provides a key database for the continuous improvement of similar interventions. The data reflects the voice of the people impacted by the activities, as well as the value that they add or, in some cases, detract from their well-being and quality of life.