Social Return on Investment of an Innovative Employment Option for Persons with Developmental Disabilities

Abstract

Common Ground Co-operative (CGC) provides training, administrative, and job coach support to five social enterprises for which persons with developmental disabilities are the non-share-capital partners. This study examines the use of social return on investment (SROI) as a means of determining the value of program impacts related to quality-of-life changes for enterprise partners and their families. The process of conducting this SROI analysis is described and analyzed in terms of its utility in employment services for persons with developmental disabilities. Keywords: social enterprise, social return on investment, case study, research, disabilities PERSONS WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES INCLUDE THOSE WHO HAVECOGNITIVE and/or physical disabilities that are evident before the age of twenty-two and tend to be lifelong (American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities 2013). Common Ground Co-operative (CGC), the organization that is the focus of this article, serves persons with developmental disabilities, most of whom could be identifi ed as having an intellectual disability that includes limitations in both cognitive abilities and adaptive behavior that are present before the age of eighteen (American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities 2013). Historically, persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities have experienced abuse, social exclusion, and rights restrictions, including limited access to education, involuntary institutionalization, and Th e authors thank Common Ground Co-operative staff , partners, and their family members who so generously contributed to this study. We also express our sincere gratitude to Dr. Fayez Elayan, Department of Accounting, Brock University, for his consultation on this project, and Drs. Jack Quarter and Sherida Ryan, University of Toronto, for their patient leadership and skillful instruction throughout this research. Th is research was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. (Scheerenberger 1983;Sobsey 1994). Even their very right to life has been questioned (Watson and Griffi ths 2009;Watson, Stainton, and Sobsey 2012). However, during the past century and a half there have been dramatic shifts in scientifi c awareness, theoretical conceptualization, legal protections, and service confi gurations from a focus on the protection of society from persons with developmental disabilities to a commitment to the protection of their rights and promotion of their self-advocacy and inclusion in the community (Owen et al. 2009). Although gains have been made in many jurisdictions, especially in deinstitutionalization and community living, the area of employment remains challenging for both theoretical and practical reasons. Nonprofi t Management & LeadershipTh is article examines the social return on investment (SROI) of an innovative employment model for persons with developmental disabilities, a group that has among the lowest rates of employment in Canada (Statistics Canada 2006;Turcotte 2014). Soc...

Moving on from Scaling Up: Further Progress in Developing Social Impact Measurement in the Third Sector

“…Of the remaining 15 articles, seven appear in journals dedicated to the voluntary/non-profit sector (Arvidson et al, 2013Arvidson & Lyon, 2014;Mook et al, 2015;Owen et al, 2015;Walk et al, 2015;Bretos & Marcuello, 2016) while five come from a variety of journals in business and management (Rath & Schuyt, 2014;Hall et al, 2015;Slater & Aiken, 2015;Polonsky et al, 2016;Serrano-Cinca et al, 2016). Of these, it is worth noting that Hall et al (2015) is perhaps incorrectly categorised, since it is explicitly focused on accounting aspects and even includes the word "accounting" in the title of the paper.…”

“…Taking up this call, , Arvidson & Lyon (2014), Mook et al (2015) and Owen et al (2015) examine a variety of issues arising from the use of SROI within TSOs via a number of case studies. Some of these studies tend to focus in particular on the problems associated with impact measurement, with Arvidson & Lyon (2014) highlighting the tendency for impact measurement to become decoupled from organisational strategy in the face of external monitoring pressures, and Owen et al (2015) emphasising the difficulties smaller TSOs face in determining reliable proxies for social value. Others seek to develop more constructive methodological insights that might address the limitations of quantitative approaches to social impact measurement.…”

The association between employment and the health of people with intellectual disabilities: A systematic review

“…Typical forms of activity and employment opportunities for people with intellectual disabilities include segregated day programs and sheltered workshops, and supported employment (SE) in competitive settings with typical wages and ongoing individualized support services (Owen et al, 2015). In view of the impact of employment on health and well-being, internationally policy concerning people with intellectual disabilities has been directed towards improving the employment opportunities of people with intellectual disabilities (Blamires, 2015;Siperstein, Heyman, & Stokes, 2014), with policy favouring community-based employment (Beyer, Brown, Akandi, & Rapley, 2010).…”

Leading a Large‐Scale Distributed Social Enterprise

“…Thus Ebrahim and Rangan () suggest that the Goodwill measurement scheme would depend upon the theory of change it uses to promote change in the community. For example, if its theory of change is concerned only with the delivery of employment and employment‐specific services, then “integrated results” composed of aggregate outcomes should be measured (Owen et al ). However, if its theory is complex, promoting long‐term change within entire communities, then “ecosystem results” and long‐term metrics about their communities would be appropriate (Mook et al ).…”