Beyond the annual report: the value of evidence for strengthening business and society

Publicado em 10 de setembro de 2026 por lxavier

By Joana Noffs, Project Analyst at IDIS

In the world of social projects and programs, it is common for data gathering to be limited to reporting periods, with evidence hastily mobilized to fill the colorful pages of annual reports. In this routine, numbers play an important role in transparency, but their potential remains largely untapped: demonstrating that the investment was made and that reach targets were achieved.

When information is left until the last minute, organizations miss the opportunity to use data to learn throughout the process and demonstrate the value generated within the organization itself through corporate social investment. The absence of strategic indicators leaves social and environmental investment more vulnerable, increasing the risk that the business will view it as a cost to be cut during periods of economic downturn. Moreover, when a territorial diagnosis is brought into the process before the pen even hits the paper, combining indicators with local listening, the logic is reversed: off-the-shelf solutions give way to interventions that are more responsive to local perspectives, capable of identifying bottlenecks, mitigating risks, and uncovering concrete opportunities for innovation and development within the value chain itself. Data becomes the language that translates realities on the ground to the decision-making table, helping ensure the sustainability and continuity of this investment within the corporate budget.

This was the central provocation of the panel “Impact That Creates Value: When Data Strengthens Business and Society”, held during the Brazilian Philanthropy Forum 2026. Moderated by Dihego Pansini, Executive Director of Instituto Alcoa, the panel challenged the sector to position itself within the transition proposed by the event’s theme: Between Essence and Reinvention.

Panel ‘Impact That Creates Value: When Data Strengthens Business and Society’ during the Brazilian Philanthropy Forum 2026

If the essence of social investment lies in a commitment to generating real transformation in people’s lives, its reinvention requires moving beyond historically top-down philanthropic practices, making diagnosis and evaluation ongoing channels for incorporating the voices of those who live in the territories and work throughout the entire value chain.

“Good business has to be good for everyone.” This motto, which Claudia Calais, Executive Director of Fundação Bunge, learned from her father as a child, illustrated her remarks. In her view, times have changed and things have become more urgent. The ESG agenda itself has gained urgency, while resources have become scarcer. This context requires corporate social investment to work alongside the value chain and strengthen public policies. At Fundação Bunge, a review of its strategy shifted the focus toward productive inclusion and a low-carbon economy, and the turning point was having data and indicators that demonstrated the value generated both externally and within the organization itself, as Claudia explained.

Claudia Calais, Executive Director of Fundação Bunge

“Our main turning point with the indicators, beyond directing the investment and showing whether we were on the right path, was that we began to engage with the investor on equal terms. (…) It is extremely important for me to measure what I am doing from the project’s perspective, but it is equally important that, through indicators showing what I deliver to the business, the business can see me as an investment, rather than a cost.”

A clear example of this two-way relationship emerged from the goal of ensuring that part of the biofuel supply would come from family farming. Instead of relying on producers in southern Brazil, who were already structured to meet the demand, Bunge invested in qualifying and organizing farming families in Brazil’s semi-arid Northeast into cooperatives. The result delivered what the business needed to participate in public tenders, in line with the public policy established by the Social Biofuel Seal, while also generating transformation in the region where it operates.

The effective use of evidence may require going beyond reach figures. Andressa Vasconcelos, Impact Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist at Fundação Sicredi, explained that at Sicredi, social investment must be accountable to its 10 million members, who deliberate on the R$400 million invested annually:

“Cooperativism is always about coming together based on an understanding of what is missing in a territory and how we, as a society, can organize ourselves to achieve this common goal. (…) So it is a tremendous responsibility to have initiatives that effectively generate transformation.”

In 2020, through the A União Faz a Vida Program, the organization conducted a Social Return on Investment (SROI) evaluation with IDIS. The assessment indicated a return of R$4 for every R$1 invested and revealed that secondary aspects of the Theory of Change were generating impacts that carried greater weight than the initiative’s central objective. Based on these learnings, the organization revisited its methodology and moved toward a causal evaluation focused on the pedagogical dimension, demonstrating direct progress among participating students in variables associated with cooperativism, such as autonomy, critical thinking, and collaboration. Above all, the value of the evaluation processes lay in the learning they generated, which was incorporated into the initiative, allowing it to be improved and its intended impact to be achieved.

“So, for us, impact evaluation is also a tool for accountability to our members. But above all, it is a tool for us to learn. To learn and evolve.”

Evidence also helps refine the map guiding the Foundation’s efforts to generate value for society — its Theory of Change, which identifies prosperity as a long-term objective. By conducting a nationwide survey to understand what Brazilians consider to be “prosperity,” Sicredi found that the concept goes beyond money, guiding the creation of non-financial solutions for territories.

Reading and interpreting evidence also makes it possible to address urgent issues pragmatically. Catarina reported that Fundação ArcelorMittal drew on data and qualified listening to incorporate the circular economy into its strategy.

“We had previous work involving evidence, facts, and data so that we could incorporate a new area of work, the circular economy,” she explained. “What made this agenda possible was realizing a unique opportunity to connect two ends of the same transformation chain. (…) We saw an opportunity to generate shared value for the business as well as for the community and society. But in order for us to choose the circular economy as a strategy for Fundação ArcelorMittal, we started with this listening process — a qualified listening process.”

A participatory diagnosis involving community leaders, public authorities, and local communities showed that waste management was a local priority. When this was combined with the reality of the 800,000 waste pickers in Brazil, many of whom are in situations of social vulnerability, according to a study conducted by AgoSocial in partnership with ArcelorMittal, as well as with the company’s goals of improving access to scrap metal and reducing emissions, the Foundation connected the steel value chain with efforts to strengthen these workers. The strategy seeks to bring citizenship, dignity, and visibility to waste pickers, who are responsible for more than 90% of recycling in the country, demonstrating that “when we talk about the circular economy, we also need to talk about social justice”, as Catarina emphasizes.

The conversation outlined three ways in which the private sector can use data in social investment: guiding the selection of agendas, generating continuous learning about the transformation produced, and connecting people and territories to corporate strategy. As Dihego Pansini emphasized in his summary of the panel, Monitoring and Assessment has a clear role in ensuring transparency, but the next step is to use this learning to inform organizations’ decision-making processes. This progress requires data to serve not only as a measurement tool, but also as a means of listening to and incorporating different voices and demands into the very construction of these agendas.

Dihego Pansini, Executive Director of Instituto Alcoa

When information ceases to be merely a record in a report and becomes part of day-to-day management, monitoring becomes a living process, making it possible to adjust strategies to increase impact, bring companies closer to communities, and provide the intelligence needed to strengthen the business itself and ensure its long-term sustainability.

Check ou the full panel:

Reinventing philanthropy also means sharing power

Publicado em 10 de setembro de 2026 por lxavier

Responder

By Beatriz Santos, Project Analyst at IDIS

In a context of rapid change, reinventing oneself seems to have become an obligation for any organization that wants to remain relevant. In philanthropy, this discussion is often associated with new technologies, financial mechanisms, or strategies. All of these matter. But the panel “Reinvention Now. Relevance Always!”, held during the Brazilian Philanthropy Forum 2026, raised a more fundamental question: there can be no meaningful reinvention without clarity about what needs to remain.

Panel ‘Reinvention Now. Relevance Always!’, during the Brazilian Philanthropy Forum 2026

The discussion began with the opening remarks by Conceição Evaristo. By emphasizing that philanthropy must pursue social justice, the writer proposed understanding it not simply as giving, but as sharing. If philanthropy means love for humanity, its essence must lie in a commitment to people, social justice, and the transformation of realities. In other words, the essence should not change; what needs to evolve are the paths used to put it into practice.

Essence Guides Reinvention

At the event, this relationship was reflected in the experiences shared by Valcléia dos Santos, from Fundação Amazônia Sustentável (FAS); Vitor Hugo Neia, from Fundação Grupo Volkswagen; and Somachi Chris-Asoluka, from the Tony Elumelu Foundation.

Valcléia dos Santos, from Fundação Amazônia Sustentável (FAS)

Speaking about work in the Amazon, Valcléia highlighted the challenges of operating in remote territories marked by logistical difficulties, limited access to public services, and historical inequalities. In these contexts, turning resources into action requires listening to communities and recognizing that needs cannot be defined solely from the perspective of those who fund or implement a project. Communities are the ones who know their territories, their priorities, and the solutions that may work. Listening, therefore, cannot be merely a consultation step; it must also inform decision-making so that initiatives can adapt as contexts change.

The experience of Fundação Grupo Volkswagen revealed another dimension of this process, when the organization realized that its work had become disconnected from local territories and that its results no longer reflected the transformations it sought to promote. It therefore became necessary to revisit its strategy, move closer to local realities, and strengthen the capacities of organizations and communities. This shift, however, also meant reconnecting with something embedded in the Foundation’s own history: its attention to workers’ trajectories and social mobility. In this case, reinventing itself did not mean abandoning its essence, but finding a more coherent way to express it in the present.

The Tony Elumelu Foundation, meanwhile, starts from the understanding that Africa’s development should be led by local entrepreneurs. To support this vision, it provides training, access to capital, and support networks, seeking to adapt its strategies to different economic, social, and cultural realities. Technology emerges as an important — and above all, inclusive — tool, representing reinvention through the strengthening of the organization’s purpose without creating barriers.

From Participation to Sharing

The three experiences show that the essence of philanthropy does not lie in preserving projects, models, or ways of working. These elements can — and should — change. What remains is the ethical commitment to people, social justice, and long-term transformation. Reinvention is precisely what allows these principles to remain meaningful in new contexts. For this reason, sharing cannot mean simply transferring resources; it also means sharing the ability to identify problems, set priorities, and build solutions. In other words, sharing power.

Public during the Panel

This discussion is at the heart of approaches such as trust-based philanthropy, flexible funding, and locally led development. A 2026 analysis by Dalberg on philanthropic trends found that 83% of the large U.S. foundations surveyed reported some form of stakeholder participation. However, only 10% said they had actually transferred decision-making power to grantee organizations or communities. This gap shows that creating spaces for participation does not necessarily mean sharing decision-making power.

In its own work on trust-based philanthropy, IDIS highlights practices such as active listening, greater flexibility in the use of resources, simpler processes, and closer relationships between funders and grantee organizations. These practices reaffirm that the knowledge needed to transform a reality is not concentrated solely among those who control the resources.

Essence, reinvention, and relevance are therefore directly connected. Essence defines why philanthropy exists. Reinvention determines how it responds to changes in the present, while relevance depends on the ability to do both at the same time. An organization can preserve its ways of working and still drift away from its essence. Likewise, it can adopt technologies and innovative models without creating meaningful change.

Reinvention, on the other hand, is not about changing for the sake of change. It means recognizing when a strategy is no longer responding to its context and building new paths without losing sight of its purpose. After all, if philanthropy intends to remain relevant, its central question should not be only “What should we fund?” but also “Who gets to participate in deciding what needs to be done?”

Ultimately, sharing resources matters. But sharing the ability to choose the paths forward brings philanthropy closer to its essence: promoting social justice and helping ensure that people are protagonists in the transformations that affect their own lives.

Check out the full panel: