From Framework to Practice: Testing WASH Impact Indicators in the Real World

Author: Sam Mendelson & Marcela Perez.

In 2021, the WASH Action Group - co-led by e-MFP and Aqua for All - set out to address a structural problem in the sector: while WASH finance was expanding, impact measurement was not keeping pace. Across the ecosystem, financial institutions, investors, and enterprises were being asked to report similar outcomes using different indicators, definitions, and formats. This fragmentation made comparison difficult, increased reporting burden, and limited the ability of investors to interpret results across portfolios. At the same time, this constrained learning and weakened the case for scaling investment. 

For the past five years, the Action Group has been trying to address a major challenge: the absence of a shared, practical approach to measuring the impact of WASH finance: to support better WASH outcomes by making WASH finance more credible, more comparable, and easier to scale. A harmonised indicator framework is not an end in itself, but a necessary condition for achieving this. Without it, it becomes significantly harder to manage performance, identify trends, allocate capital effectively, or build confidence among decision-makers.  

A phased approach  

So, what has happened up to now? In 2023-24, an initial set of indicators was developed to capture the financial, social, climate, and service-level dimensions of WASH investments, followed by a feasibility assessment that examined how these indicators aligned with existing practices across asset managers, financial institutions, and SMEs. This earlier research highlighted persistent challenges, including inconsistent reporting requirements, limited data availability, and the operational difficulty of capturing more complex outcomes.  

Building on these findings, Phase III - which has just wrapped up - focused on pilot testing the framework with financial service providers (FSPs) in real-world settings, and refining them iteratively based on feasibility and usefulness. Working with participating FSPs, indicators were integrated into operational workflows and tested through a combination of MIS-based reporting and targeted survey tools. The process was iterative: indicators were assessed against criteria such as clarity, feasibility, ease of adoption, data availability, and analytical relevance, and then retained, refined, merged, or dropped accordingly.  

This iterative approach was essential. Earlier phases had already shown that some indicators - particularly those related to health outcomes or climate - are inherently more difficult to measure, often requiring primary data collection and additional resources. Others, particularly those integrated into routine MIS collection and reporting systems, are significantly easier to capture.  

The result, produced with the invaluable support of Microsave Consulting (MSC) is a validated and field-tested framework, now presented in a new report entitled Unpacking Impact to Unlock Scale: Pilot Testing the WASH Impact Indicator Framework that reflects both the ambition of standardised impact measurement and the practical realities of implementation. 

The output of this research has been not only the refined WASH impact indicator framework, but also an operational manual, providing clear definitions, data sources, and reporting guidance on all 11 indicators and 44 sub-indicators, and standardised data collection tools and templates. 

The indicator framework and associated tools were launched at a webinar on February 11th, and now the WASH AG must turn attention to the next important objective - adoption and use of these indicators, and development of a harmonised data collection framework for WASH finance. 

So what comes next? From framework to real-world adoption 

Achieving meaningful scale will require buy-in from investors, asset managers, and other ecosystem actors who shape reporting expectations and capital flows. If widely adopted, a shared approach to WASH impact measurement has the potential to reduce reporting fatigue for investees while improving transparency and comparability for investors. More importantly, it can help shift the framework from a tool used by a small number of institutions to a common language for the sector.  

The next phase of work will focus on operationalising data collection and reporting at scale. The Action Group will convene an online roundtable on May 20th of WASH investors and investees to demonstrate data submission processes and explore the value proposition of standardising WASH impact data - particularly through integration with the ATLAS data platform. This will be a chance not just to demonstrate this process using real but anonymised data collected during Phase III, but a chance to hear from these participants about their pain points, capacity and priorities. We are currently having discussions with relevant stakeholders in advance of this meeting, to gather feedback, address practical considerations, and shape how this next phase is implemented. 

e-MFP and Aqua for All are proud of what this AG has achieved so far, and are looking forward to taking this from framework to practice. If you would like to discuss the indicators, the round-table, WASH finance generally, or if you wish to support this work (including via funding the AG generally or any specific project in particular), please get in touch with the co-heads Sam (smendelson@e-mfp.eu) and Marcela (m.perez@aquaforall.org). 

Photo credit: Masudar Rahman via pexels

About the Authors: Sam Mendelson & Marcela Perez are the co-heads of the WASH Action Group.