Page cover

Measuring the impact of investigative reporting

THE CASE STUDY

This case study looked at how the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) has evolved the way it measures the impact of its work both in terms of reporting to donors but also informing how it follows up on its investigations through further reporting. The case study also heard from one of OCCRP's donors, USAID.

Traditional monitoring and evaluation

Before setting out their current methodology, the meeting heard about how OCCRP used to focus on metrics such as whether investigations were trending on social media and website data.

These kinds of metrics also fail to acknowledge the fact that investigative reporting:

Is seen as a vehicle to address countless development goals: anti-corruption, access to information, creating an informed citizenry, democracy-building, building civil society, accountability, and many more.

Measuring impact by accountability

Effective monitoring and evaluation, the OCCRP case study suggests, in large part depend on having a viable, clear theory of change.

“OCCRP’s primary basis for measuring impact is increased accountability. We measure this in terms of illicitly acquired funds returned to the public sphere; civic actions, such as a protest calling for change; government actions, such as when a government seeks evidence from another government based on an investigation; corporate actions, such as when a financial institution closes a loophole in the banking system; resignations and sackings, like when a prime minister is forced to quit; official investigations, usually opened by a national prosecutor; and arrests, indictments, and sentences.”

Strengths of the OCCRP approach

For more resources on measuring the impact of investigative journalism see:

Limitations of the OCCRP approach

While the strengths of the OCCRP approach are considerable, the case study also identified some limitations:

Opportunities from the OCCRP approach

It was also noted in the breakout group that the way some investigative journalism organisations report results in a context where results are not expected to be achieved in a linear way has similarities to the methodology of Outcome Mapping.

Taking the long view

USAID has been supporting OCCRP since 2007 which enables them to take a long term perspective on OCCRP's growth as an organisation.

The importance of donors being patient when supporting investigative reporting was emphasised by both USAID and OCCRP.

This approach has led to OCCRP being "the most decorated investigative reporting organisation in Eastern Europe."

"Its members’ networks are regularly called upon to testify at multilateral meetings and hearings; OCCRP also advocates for safer working conditions by providing and pushing donors and policymakers to push for focussing on digital, physical and legal security; has also mentored other partners and outlets; and is an incubator of technology."

BREAKOUT GROUP

Breakout group three was attended by

  • 6 representatives of investigative journalism organisations

  • 3 media development donors

  • 5 representatives of media development/journalism support organisations involved in policy and learning

  • and 1 independent researcher

Gender ratio: 7 Male / 8 Female

Participants selected which breakout group they wanted to attend.

Summary

The breakout group agreed that continued long-term support for cross-border, collaborative investigative journalism is essential.

The group put forward a number of areas for future research and ideas for how donors adjust how they approach supporting investigative journalism.

Advice to donors new to investigative journalism

The group welcomed the prospect of new supporters for investigative journalism but warned that considering the complexities and risks, it is essential that they collaborate with more experienced donors and listen to the advice that already exists.

A guide for donors already exists - How to fund investigative journalism Insights from the field and its key donors - DW Akademie (2020).

And events held dedicated to this topic as recently as 2019.

Potential solutions:

Smaller or newer supporters of investigative journalism might consider teaming up with other donors to

  • Provide funding that is longer-term.

  • Pool resources and knowledge on safety, security and monitoring and evaluation.

  • Reduce the burden of having to provide multiple reports for multiple donors

Evaluating investigative skills

Emphasis should be placed on evaluating the skills of the investigative journalists and organisations, looking at key indicators like accuracy, fairness, the quality and number of sources, as well as how libelous a story was.

Suggested solution:

Donors need to involve the right profile of people when evaluating investigative journalism.

As it is unlikely to be practical to bring the expertise in-house, could these skill sets be pooled between donors?

Enabling environments

Often a measure of the impact of investigative journalism is whether you are “moving the needle” or “creating enabling environments” on issues around good governance, fighting corruption, human rights and other areas in the public interest.

However, participants noted that in closed societies, this can be an unrealistic expectation considering that even measuring your audience can be problematic if your work is primarily being accessed by VPN or being shared by messaging apps.

Can a hostile action indicate impact?

One of the donors in the breakout group posed this question:

Should investigative journalists and their supporters consider negative responses to their work (SLAPPs, lawsuits, harassment) - assuming that reporting was accurate and met high editorial standards - as an indirect way to measure impact?

Some donors appear to be open to this idea but further research is needed to codify and test this.

Awards and recognition

One of the donors in the group argued that the following could, in some circumstances, be useful indicators of impact:

Collaborating with civil society

Recent trends of investigative journalists collaborating with advocacy and civil society groups are to be welcomed.

It was acknowledged that there need to be strict rules of engagement to ensure that investigative journalists are not seen as activists.

However, considering the hostile environment towards investigative journalism, the benefit of collaborating with civil society is that it helps achieve some of the ultimate outcomes that donors wish to see: transparency, anti-corruption, access to information, creating an informed citizenry, democracy-building, building civil society, accountability.

Future GFMD IMPACT meetings

OCCRP will be invited to share best practice from their collaboration with Transparency International so that can be shared so others can learn from the experience.

Last updated

Was this helpful?