Strengthening Impact Measurement: Human-Centered Assessment Drives Social Change
Across decades of work in education, community development, and social enterprise, I’ve observed that meaningful impact is rarely the result of a single intervention. It emerges when capital, the proposed solution, and the surrounding system are in genuine alignment. Measuring that impact—and, importantly, enabling the very conditions that produce it—requires a human-centered approach to data. Foundations, philanthropists, and social investors can optimize outcomes by embedding human-centered data collection into their strategy from the outset, ensuring that metrics capture the lived realities of the people and communities they aim to serve and produce insights that directly inform actionable decision-making.
Measurement as a Key Character Rather than a Bit Player
Impact measurement is most valuable when it drives continuous improvement and innovation—not when it functions as a compliance exercise. Several years ago, some partners and I helped create the Assessment for Learning Project (ALP), a $20M grant-funded initiative to reimagine K–12 assessment in the United States. A central objective was shifting the paradigm from “assessment of learning” to “assessment for learning”. This was not semantics. It was a systemic attempt to reposition assessment from a reductive, end-of-cycle activity to a core part of the learning process itself.
A key dimension of that effort involved paying close attention to the personas most affected by data collection. How might we empower educators and learners to co-own their data? And how might that ownership reshape the quality, use, and meaning of the data?
By designing data systems grounded in the lived experiences and needs of students, teachers, and administrators, we unlocked real-time insights that fueled iteration, adaptation, and deeper engagement. In doing so, the measurement itself became a lens for learning rather than simply a way to keep score—ultimately driving stronger, more sustainable outcomes.
Relational Trust and Contextual Insight
The opportunity to measure differently is not simply a technical improvement—it is an imperative that meaningfully correlates with outcomes. When expectations and norms around measurement are established early and refined collaboratively, relational trust becomes a core design principle. This reframes measurement from a “gotcha” mechanism into a vehicle for connection, authenticity, and deeper contextual understanding.
Human-centered measurement requires co-design with local stakeholders to elevate what truly matters. At 2Revolutions, we have built learning ecosystems that integrate real-time data from districts, states, and universities—yet we never assume traditional indicators are sufficient. Instead, we layer in co-created qualitative and quantitative measures tailored to the goals and realities of the work.
Data collection is treated as a shared practice: interviews, observations, and continuous feedback loops engage educators, leaders, and community partners as active co-owners of the process, not passive subjects of it. The very act of collecting data becomes an opportunity to strengthen buy-in, deepen understanding, and align partners around a shared theory of change. People feel heard and respected.
Trust and collaboration allow data to reveal not just what is happening, but why it is happening, and how strategy can evolve to improve.
Measuring What Matters vs. Defaulting to Traditional Metrics
Metrics reflect values. Yet in many contexts, what is traditionally measured is disconnected from what communities say they want. Nowhere is this more visible than in K–12 education.
Across the country, hundreds of districts and more than twenty states have created a “Portrait of a Graduate”—a process through which communities articulate the knowledge, skills, and mindsets they want students to have for life after high school. These portraits often reflect deep local engagement and strong consensus.
Yet despite this clarity, the metrics that states and districts actually use remain largely unchanged. Standardized tests still shape the majority of accountability systems. The competencies that communities truly value—such as collaboration, communication, problem-solving, adaptability, and civic contribution—are rarely measured at scale. Though, there is a growing body of research that substantiates the importance of these skills as a correlate to high school completion, college persistence, and college success.
When what matters most is not what gets measured, communities become disenchanted and educators feel disenfranchised. The system sends a clear message that local priorities are aspirational, not actionable. And in the end, communities lose. Human-centered measurement helps reverse this disconnect by ensuring that data systems reflect community values and aspirations rather than defaulting to legacy indicators.
So What, Now What
Human-centered data collection transforms measurement from a transactional activity into a strategic tool. When capital, analytics, and relationships converge, social investors gain the insight needed to understand not only what works, but how and why it works within a specific context.
Foundations and enterprises that integrate human-centered metrics into their impact frameworks can:
create actionable, context-sensitive insights;
strengthen community ownership and trust;
improve decision-making and resource allocation; and ultimately
drive more scalable and sustainable systemic change.
In doing so, they increase the likelihood that every dollar invested translates into meaningful, measurable improvement in people’s lives. Human-centered measurement is not just an approach—it is a catalyst for aligning systems, accelerating learning, and enabling transformative social change.
