Our Impact Framework

Staying true to our purpose: How we measure impact

All our investees are seeking to be impactful and the collective impact they create is a matter of  inspiration for all of us. Its therefore important to get a good handle on this collective impact so we can track progress and remain accountable. This not only helps us stay focused on our purpose, but also helps our entrepreneurs serve their customers better.

We recognize that measuring impact is an art and a science. In our approach, we strive towards rigour, but aim to avoid the trap of false precision. We capture key metrics in a unifying framework, but also seek to learn from the varied nuances of our investees’ work. We aim for simplicity but strive for insight.

For all of us at Omidyar Network India, the impact achieved to date has spurred an even greater commitment to working with those who can create a meaningful life for every Indian. As our organization evolves, we plan to refine our approach, to incorporate learnings from our experience and continually improve the utility of our framework.

We would love to hear your feedback on our impact framework and ideas on how to improve it. Please write to us at contact@omidyarnetwork.in

We measure two types of impact:


Effect of the products/services offered by our investees on their customers/beneficiaries.

  • Reach: Number of lives touched
    We measure the total number of people directly served by our investees (called our ‘end-customers’ from hereon).
  • Depth: Quality of life improvement
    We measure the degree to which the lives of our end-customers have been positively affected by the interventions of investees.
  • Inclusion: Percentage of NHB customers
    We measure where our end-customers lie in India’s income distribution, specifically tracking customers who are from the 'Next Half Billion' (NHB). For measurement purposes, we estimate this as a percentage of customers from the bottom 60 percent of India's income distribution

Sector ImpacT

Positive catalytic change on the sector that goes beyond the direct impact that the investees have on their customers/beneficiaries

  • "Imitators"
    We measure how many organisations have replicated or adapted the investees’ model to estimate whether the investor's model has spurred traction among other entrepreneurs.
  • Follow-on capital raised
    We measure the follow-on capital raised by the investee since ONI funding, to estimate if our investment has crowded in interest of other funders.
  • Contribution to impactful ecosystem changes
    We measure the extent to which our investees’ work is contributing to impactful ecosystem changes. We have developed a graded framework to get a sense of the extent of contribution made by the investee, along the ‘activities’ to ‘outcomes’ continuum.

In addition to measuring these six metrics, we also track specific impact indicators that are unique to each investee, based on the sector in which they operate. This helps assess their contribution to impact at a granular level, in consonance with the investment’s ‘theory of impact’.

Our assessment is based on an extensive process, including data collection from investees, customer insights surveys undertaken by an external organization, and reviews with our investment teams.

We aggregate the results obtained across all investees, and assess progress at the level of our initiatives, our four strategic pillars, and as an organization as a whole.

We also maintain a snapshot of all investees across the dimensions of Direct Impact and Sector Impact as explained in the figure below.


Green Graph
Green Graph
Graph Green


Green Graph
Green Graph
Graph Green

1. Reach does not represent unique lives, as the same person may be served by multiple ONI investees. 2. Depth and inclusion are captured for 22 investees who did Lean Data in 2021, 16  investees in 2019 and 11 investees in 2018; in 2021 we have calculated the aggregate percentage basis weighted reach for each investee;. Depth and inclusion have not been reported for 2020  because Lean Data studies were not conducted in light of the pandemic. 3. 2018 and 2019 numbers are calculated using the Poverty Probability Index methodology (i.e., capturing those earning less than $3.20/day (in 2011 PPP$)), while the 2021 number uses ‘Wealth Quintile Index’.  Note: Results reported for 2021 are as of 30 September 2021.