2016 and 2017 Return on Investment, Development Impact

Impact Assessments:Lessons Learnt2015/2016REANA ROSSOUW:NEXT GENERATION CONSULTANTS

Next Generation Consultants

2Who we are:

Next Generation Consultants helps organisations to become more sustainable and have greater positive impact on the economy, society and the environment.

In the community/social investment and development sectors - we provide consulting and advisory, research and engagement, training and facilitation, impact assessment and due diligence services.

We have developed the Investment Impact Index™ - a methodology that measures the impact and return on investment of social/community and enterprise development investments.

We are recognised as industry/subject experts and thought leaders within the sustainable/social/ community development sectors.

2016/05/03

Please see: http://www.slideshare.net/Reana1/measuring-impact-and-return-on-investment-of-corporate-social-investment-and-community-development AND http://www.slideshare.net/Reana1/evidence-of-impact-and-return-on-investment-


3Background:

Our vision To continuously contribute to increased socio economic impact and ensure

enhanced shared value and sustainability for all shareholders on the continent Our Context

We have developed the Investment Impact Index (III)™ in 2009. Since then we have assessed R3 billion worth of social/community and

enterprise development investments. This included the assessment of more than 600 programs across 15 focus areas/investment portfolio’s.

As an outcome of our work we have developed an indicator library with more than 5 000 indicators. We have also identified 15 dimensions of impact and more than 15 dimensions of return.

Evidence This presentation is an update and representation of our work, case studies

and evidence of impact and return for major funders in Africa. In particular – to assist the industry with developing indicators to measure impact and return.2016/05/03


4Why measure impact?

To improve and consider a range of stakeholder opinions, communication and reporting

To plan/revise a program/strategy To strengthen/inform future work To learn/confirm whether original

objectives were achieved To learn/understand/quantify and

qualify outcomes, impact and return To consider all input resources

collectively To provide an opportunity to not only

confirm impact (change) but also to understand what was done right/wrong

It provides a holistic overview of all investments – collectively – and individually

To make resource allocation decisions

To share organisational and development practices within the field

To share best practices/lessons learnt

To learn about implementation In support of advocacy/policy

recommendations To contribute to the development

of a body of knowledge in the field/sector

To implement/determine sustainability scaling/replication strategies

To strengthen public policy 2016/05/03


5Guiding Principles of our work:

Impact means impact The goal is to understand what changes as a result of investment from donors in communities as

beneficiaries and recipients of interventions The impact is shared

The goal is to understand who is impacted along the value chain – including donors, intermediaries and beneficiaries

Impact includes and involve all stakeholders Analysis must be comprehensive. Instead of cherry picking something that’s working and leaving

out what is not, the analysis should include all aspects of impact and those impacted Results must be transparent

Companies should report to their investors, and investors should aggregate and report results. What is left out should be stated. Assumptions and sources should be stated. It should be possible for a third party to replicate the analysis based on the documentation of it and get the same result.

Context matters It is harder to create a stable job in a rural area than in a city. The qualitative and quantitative

context should be provided to inform the impact as well as an understanding of how much of the problem may exist or remain.

01/08/2013


6How the model works: (1)

01/08/2013

HowWhatWhoImpact

Community Impact

Teachers

Improved capacity

Improved morale Short term

Learners Improved pass rates Social

Schools Improved enrolment Empowered

Government Leverage of resources Cost Savings


7How the model works (2)

2016/05/03

• Strategic, operational and programmatic impact• Impact and Return per program• Impact and Return per portfolio• Impact and Return on total investment

Investor (ROI)

• Organisational Impact

Intermediary (Impact)

• Individual/Community Impact• Thematic Impact

Beneficiary (Impact


8Key attributes of the III™:

Measures value to both society and the business The model builds on existing measures of value, complementing these with the

broader impacts of business on society – and the social value created through the process – as required by current reporting frameworks

Backward and forward looking The model can be applied looking backwards (past investments/programs) to

understand the value generated and looking forward (future possible impact) to inform strategy and project/investment related decisions

Flexible: The model can be applied at multiple levels – for: 1. Singular programs/interventions 2. Specific projects in a particular portfolio (i.e. education, health, etc.) 3. Impacts in a country or region or sector (i.e. local development, national or mining) 4. Within a portfolio or across the entire investment portfolio (total investment portfolio) 5. Equally it can be applied in social/community/socio economic or enterprise

development contexts 2016/05/03


9Key attributes continue:

A balanced understanding of impact By covering all the key aspects of impact – the model provides a holistic and balanced view of

value creation – not just positive impact but also negative impact, trade-off’s, causality and attribution

Consistent information By analysing quantitative and qualitative data – through comparing, synthesizing and

triangulating data – over time and between different strategic objectives – by involving stakeholders – a balanced and consistent view of impact can be built – agreed too and confirmed by all stakeholders

Comparable information By equalising all impact and return (to the value of 1) – it provides for comparison across

different types of impacts – which provides value no matter the type or size of investment/input resources

Produces decision ready/useful information It provides a strengthened basis for decision-making, (for all stakeholders) and provides timely

and reliable data that employs estimates, assumptions and attribution that are fit for purpose to make better informed decisions and engage stakeholders in meaningful discussions

Focuses on material impacts One size does not fit all. The framework enables funders to select their focus and impact as well

as return2016/05/03


10

State of current Practice:

THE FOLLOWING RESEARCH DATA IS THE OUTCOME OF OUR OWN RESEARCH DURING IMPACT ASSESSMENTS

2016/05/03


11The state of M & E practices:

2016/05/03

90% of all funders and intermediaries measure their work through quantitative assessment

75% of all funders and intermediaries claim they have the capacity to measure their work

58% of all funders and intermediaries have a framework to measure their work

24 % of all funders and intermediaries have a data

evaluation framework

25% of all funders and intermediaries have an

evaluation plan5% of all funders collect

qualitative date


12Barriers to evaluation:

2016/05/03

Limited staff time (71%)

Insufficient financial resources (61%)

Funders:Funders asking for the wrong

data (32%)

Funders and intermediaries:Don’t know where to find

expertise/independent evaluators (21%)

Limited staff expertise

(43%)

Intermediaries:Low on list of priorities (Fundraising, financial

management and communications) are more

important (20%)


13The issues experienced during program impact assessments:

-There is no evidence

that selected programs have conducted

feasibility, efficiency, viability, sustainability or cost benefit analysis

There is no evidence that selection criteria are being applied to

the suitability of selected programs for

envisaged impact

+All programs can be

monitored and evaluated

All programs fulfil some social need


14The issues experienced during focus area impact assessments:

2016/05/03

-On average each funder in SA

has 4 focus areas

Generally – each focus area are seen as completely

separate investment areas

Focus areas are aligned (after the fact) to popular

development contexts (NDP/SDG’s)

There is no evidence in SA that focus areas were chosen

based on community stakeholder input

+There is some evidence that focus areas are

based on future business priorities (i.e. education)

There is some evidence that selection criteria for programs is based on focus area selection (indicators to measure progress in a specific

context) – mostly quantitative

There is little evidence that focus areas support the overall vision, mission, strategic

objectives and intent of investment strategies

There is very little evidence that focus areas are integrated to leverage and extend impact

envisaged


15Overall - Limited Impact is evident: Limited understanding of the

often complex local contexts Insufficient participation and

ownership by local stakeholders/beneficiaries

A perception of giving rather than investment

Detachment from core business strategy and competencies

Responding to local requests in an ad hoc manner without clear focus

Lack of sufficient planning, scoping, clear objectives, outcomes

Lack of transparency and clear criteria Lack of due diligence, budget oversight,

insufficient management processes Insufficient focus on sustainability Lack of both professionalism and skills No exit or handover strategy Overemphasis on infrastructure and

under-emphasis on other development areas such as skills/capacity building

Failure to measure and communicate results either during or after project completion

And most importantly, the lack of delivery and fulfilment of promises and commitments by funders

2016/05/03


16Key challenges:

Trade Off’s Negative impact vs benefits

Loss of income from current livelihoods because of delayed implementation

Restricted local economic development because of lack of support from government

Encouraged competition – increased prices – community activism/jealousy

Increase water/energy consumption or increased carbon emissions

Attribution What would have

happened anyway? What about

policy/structural/unforeseen changes/challenges

What other factors could contribute to the impact – i.e. other funders, policy changes, etc.

2016/05/03


17

Aspects of Impact

LEARNING FROM OUR EXPERIENCE

2016/05/03

18A different perspective of the Impact value chain: Our Model - III™

2016/05/03

There are many views and perspectives of impact – not just input, activities, outputs and outcomes:

Impa

ct D

imen

sion

Economic/Social/ Socio-Economic/ EnvironmentalDirect/IndirectPositive/Negative/ CombinedIntended/ UnintendedShort/Medium/Long TermPerceived/ Empowered/ Pre-emptive & post impactSignificant/Residual/ Capital impact

Impa

ct P

ortf

olio Education &

BursariesHealth and quality of lifeEnvironment and climate changeSafety & SecurityWelfare & CommunityAgriculture and Food SecurityEconomic, Enterprise and Social DevelopmentSkills Development and Job CreationSports Development and RecreationInfrastructure and local economic development

Scop

e of

Impa

ct Project/ProgramFocus Area and investment portfolioSignature, cause related and FlagshipGeographic (region – local/national)Demographic (girls/ boys/ women/ disabled)Stakeholder based (value chain – intermediaries, learners, teachers, government departments, other funders, etc.)Company – funder/investor

Boun

dary

of i

mpa

ct Stakeholders (direct/indirect)Funders (primary/secondary)Partners (intermediaries)Time (1/3/5 year)Depth / weighted (related to strategic objectives/ outcomes) Reach (primary/ secondary/ tertiary - value chain)


19Impact over time:

Short TermShort term impacts or “quick wins” are important for projects as they build trust, credibility, and local support. They also maximise the value to the stakeholders very quickly. But when project lag and expectations are not met, then impact is diminished.Example:Food gardens/feeding schemes provide immediate relieve to/for malnutrition, food access, food security – but is not sustainable over the long term.Additionally if resources for water or seeds or access to markets are not factored in – food gardens have a short life span.

Medium TermThere does not appear to be a longer term approach for business partnerships or opportunities beyond the initial funding phase. Most programs require additional funding specifically for capacity building in order to ensure long term impact as well as sustainability – a clear oversight in current program funding cycles.Example:A science/maths program may yield increased pass rates within 12 months, but may not affect increased university access, or subject/career choices.In particular infrastructure programs require additional resources i.e. operational expenses or capacity building (maintenance) to move along the value chain.

Long TermVery few programs have access to long term funding, therefore measuring long term impact becomes impossible. 80% of all programs are only funded between 12 and 24 months, 15% of programs are funded up to 36 months, but less than 5% of all programs are funded for 60 months (5 years) meaning that impact of each and every program is diminished over time.Example:An ECD program may yield results in the form of increased school enrolment but evidence needs to be provided of improved literacy and numeracy skills or school readiness to ensure long term sustainability – if not followed by a program in primary education – as such it will be unsustainable

2016/05/17


20Types of impact:

PositivePositive impact is seen as additional to direct/intended impact. It is therefore surprising that so few proposals and subsequent programs consider ‘additional’ impact and this indicates the limited focus of particular interventions - i.e. it is only designed to achieve one specific outcome.Example:A food garden may yield additional positive impacts such as improved concentration/ ability, increased school attendance, increased motivation/positive behaviour, decrease in absenteeism, increased subject knowledge – but in general these types of programs only measures the number of people affected by the garden.

NegativeWe present two models to clients – one where negative is measured as part of the total impact scenario – and one where we subtract the negative impact from total impact.We found that negative impact plays out on two levels 1) as a result of actions from the funder i.e. delayed payments and 2) as a direct/ indirect/ unintended consequence of the program – i.e. highlighting oversight within program design aspects.Example:Providing a computer lab/Building a soccer field, but not considering security, where the water will come from or materials for maintenance or increased costs for electricity/software programs generally leads to negative impact.

Combined / CumulativeThis impact aspect reflects an opportunity to expand impact and in our experience is mostly linked to program implementation and design aspects. Example:A food garden not only increases food security, but improved nutrition which is linked to increased productivity or quality of life or improved school attendance.Aggregation and/or interaction of impacts within a system are defined from the perspective of the stakeholders experiencing them and should therefore be considered and accounted for.

2016/05/17


21Types of impact:

Direct These are impacts that can be

directly attributed to the implementation and therefore outputs and outcomes of a program.

Example: The objective was to increase

literacy/numeracy/subject knowledge or technical skills.

If the strategic objective is met and evidence is provided then there is direct or impact – i.e. stakeholders were tested and based on the results pass rates increased.

Indirect Indirect impact is very often linked to

unclear focus areas, unclear development outcomes, unclear accountability/ responsibility, lack of research, lack of engagement, lack of impact which renders the programs of little value for any stakeholder groups or that resulted in ‘accidental’ impact.

Example: The fact that classes are presented on

Saturdays requires additional resources, food, transport, security, staff and other additional costs, for both the funder and intermediary sides – therefore attendance of classes can drop and dropout rates are high – which leads to indirect impact which is negative or unconsidered impact.

2016/05/17


22Types of impact:

Intended This aspect refers to the intended (direct)

(stated/strategic objectives/outcomes) of a specific intervention. The lack of indicators to measure direct and intended impact is a serious issue, which could mean, that there was no shared value distributed. If there is little evidence of impact it is an indication that the programs funded were bad choices, or the objectives and desired/intended outcomes were not clearly defined.

Example: To improve the pass rates in maths (intended

outcome) but without specifying the minimum pass rate (80% of pupils must achieve a minimum of 70% and 60% must continue with the subject choice for the next grade – or no more than 10% drop out rate during a 3 year cycle) should confirm the intended impact objectives.

Unintended No community program is intended or

designed/implemented to have unintended impacts as this would mean that not enough planning or research or engagement has been conducted. This implies that there is disconnect between strategy/objectives, project management and execution.

Example: Whilst providing a food garden – the

garden yielded little or no production because of drought/lack of water/knowledge/skills. This program then requires additional resources as unintended impact diminishes the intended impact.

2016/05/17


23Types of impact:

Perceived ImpactA potential/perceived impact rather than an actual impact. This is about how people (stakeholders) feel about the impact and how they behave generally, thus perception is a reality to them.Example:Specifically used if impact is an anomaly – only mentioned once by a particular stakeholder group, or evidenced by few stakeholders or cannot be confirmed by other stakeholders. Because of increased skills/knowledge, salaries increased which improved the living conditions of a family and increased family sustainability.

Empower(ed) ImpactIs the enhancement of the assets and capabilities of individuals or groups to engage and influence institutions, and to increase the accountability of institutions.Example:Capacity building for stakeholder organisations/groups – now access social security services

Strengthening legal status of stakeholder groups/organisations – now increased fundraising/ marketing/attracting new donors

Stakeholder authority to manage funds, hire and fire workers, supervise work and procedure materials – increased effectiveness of organisations

Support for new and spontaneous initiatives by stakeholders – now help others to become more empowered

Pre/Post ImpactDepending on the lifecycle or life stage of a project, pre-emptive assessments can be made that will indicate post impact assessment impact.This focuses on likely impacts of a planned intervention – i.e. has not happened yet.Example:A program can be assessed to determine likely/significant impact and develop indicators to measure such impact in the future.

2016/05/17


24Types of impact:

Significant ImpactFocuses on intended outcomes – i.e. prioritisation of outcomes to be considered.Impacts are assessed for their significance according to predetermined criteria.Example:For instance – if job creation was the intended/direct outcome – the significance of the impact would refer to: Direct/indirect/full-time/part-time or even decent jobs created – not temporary jobs or below living wage categories.

Residual ImpactImpact that reflects negative impact and will continue to contribute to negative impact without mitigation/correction.Example:The intention was to create jobs, but now there is the realisation that the intervention requires substantial skills development and then certification to ensure a qualification before a job can be secured. Therefore impact envisaged was not achieved, rather residual impact can be achieved through significant changes.

Capitals ImpactTypically this could include:• Financial - (income, security, wealth, credit,

investment, savings)• Social (leadership, networks, relationships,

trust, reciprocity)• Environmental/natural capital – (landscape,

soil, land ownership, water, energy)• Human – (self-esteem, worthiness, social

cohesion)• Intellectual – (community ownership,

community assets, community contribution)• Manufactured / production – (products,

services, crafts, indigenous products)• Also considered are political impact,

institutional impact, infrastructure impact, cultural or spiritual impact – (language, traditions, rituals).

Example:Social cohesion improved (racial discrimination decreased).

2016/05/17


25

Aspects of Return on Investment

LEARNING FROM OUR EXPERIENCE

2016/05/03


26Business value of determining ROI:

KnowledgeDeep understanding of value and impact as well as risksComparative data – industry/sectorInsights into and across impact dimensions Insights into stakeholder groups affected

ActionNew or enhanced business decisions, practices and behavioursDevelop new products/services/marketsChanges policies, strategies and practices to increase impact and returnReport in a more credible, integrated and useful way

ResultsImproved performance – profitability/competitivenessReduce potential risks – community activism/licencingCost Savings – of court cases/mitigation of risksEnhanced stakeholder relationshipsImproved licence to operate conditionsImproved trust and transparency

2016/05/03

Please see: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/determining-roi-corporate-community-involvement-reana-rossouw


27Return on investment impact:

Strategic AspectsSupport of corporate values and strategiesSupport of sustainability strategy/programsSupport of future growth, development and market access

Investor / Shareholder AspectsShare price not affected when industry or sector are targeted by activistsRated as industry leader in Sustainability IndicesIncreased investment from socially responsible investment fundsInclusion and high ratings in awards programs

Reputation AspectsRecognition/awardsMedia coverageIncreased brand awareness

2016/05/03


28ROI Impact:

Profit AspectsSales generated from programsValue of new products and services generated from CI/CSI programsIncreased worker productivityIncreased share price (e.g. from attention of socially-screened investment funds)

Environmental AspectsCosts mitigated from rehabilitationCosts saved from waste management/recyclingCarbon emissions sequestratedCosts of fines

Sector Specific AspectsFinancial Sector• Economic trends and demographics and

expanding workforce needs • Increasing regulatory activity (e.g. CRA,

PRI, CRESA, JSE, investment screening)• Increasing equality/disparity between

haves/have-nots – financial inclusivity/Gini Co-efficient

• Globalization strategies• Opportunities to brand company through

community involvementMining• Intensity of opposition - Previous negative

incidents • Regulators’ sensitivities - Compatibility

with existing development • Reputation of company - Level of

community involvement • Involvement of external advocates

2016/05/03


29ROI Impact:

Stakeholder Aspects

Increased community/government awareness/positive relationships/stakeholder relationsDecreased complaints/grievances/ activism/strikes/boycotts/negative press coverageCost savings/avoidancePrevention of operational stoppages/delaysReducing/decreasing legal costs/law suitsSupport for market entry/expansion plans

Savings AspectsTax rebates received from philanthropic/ charity/social/community contributionsSaved costs of free advertising space received from media coverage of the CI/CSI programsLegal fees averted (includes legal department staff time and projected billable hours from contracted firms)

Savings Aspects ContCrisis PR efforts averted (includes PR staff time and projected billable hours from contracted firms)Costs of avoided down-time from failure to receive building approval, work stoppages, etc.Reduced employee recruitment costs, reduced turnover costs, and/or reduced absenteeismReduced employee training costs (e.g., through community service learning initiatives)Reduced customer turnoverOther staff management hours saved 2016/05/03

30ROI Impact:

Customer Aspects

Surveys indicating improved customer perceptions and impacts on shopping decisionsSales leads generated in specific geographic or demographic marketsDevelopment/increased sales of specific products/services in targeted geographic or demographic marketsAnnual brand tracking surveys indicating higher scoresCollaboration/participation/co-design of new product/service developmentGreater participation/involvement/ contribution in community investment and development programsIncreased brand awarenessIncreased customer acquisition/retention

Operational AspectsMitigation of operational risks (health/environment/safety)Support and enhancement of business operational requirements (integration, skills development, etc.)

Compliance AspectsB-BBEEE Licence to operate SLP Mandate/StrategyDMR/King III/ICMM/IPIECAApproval rates/new explorations/extensionsRehabilitationDrop in complaints/grievances Global Compliance

2016/05/03

31ROI Impact:

Employee Aspects Positive response to utilizing volunteerism for professional

development/skills development and team building Employee surveys demonstrating that volunteer activities

contribute to leadership development Voted one of the best companies to work for Surveys showing increased employee morale from participation

and increased numbers of employee volunteers, volunteer hours, and the number of company-sponsored volunteer projects

Satisfaction surveys indicating positive impact and anecdotal evidence

Employee training programs designed to use volunteers and products with most donations

Employees learning to use products to that they are more equipped to sell/market them

CSI/CI projects used for team building or during orientation/induction or other training

Recruitment from communities where CSI/CI projects are run Internal surveys showing an increase in employee pride, morale

and commitment as a result of employee involvement in volunteer activities

Social Aspects Improvement of quality of life Community job creation / empowerment Improved stakeholder relations within the

community Poverty reduction

2016/05/03


32

In Conclusion OUR NEW ROADMAP

2016/05/03

33What our clients say:

FundersIt provides validation of investment decisionsOpportunities for increased partnerships and collaborationContributes to better financial, project and risk management/reportingContributes to learning, capacity building and better results (impact)The outcome of the process informs sustainability and integrated reportsThe detailed stakeholder engagement process provide insight never documented or previously considered in evaluationsThe impact assessment process not only provides guidance for future strategies and programs, but identify areas requiring attention, confirms whether the needs of beneficiaries are met, it monitors relationships, the lessons learnt provide detailed actions of issues that needs to be addressed and improved, and it informs future best practice

IntermediariesWe feel comfortable with the transparency of the processThe process have added value to our own work – especially M&E and reporting practicesThe processes have increased our effectiveness and own performance; increased our learning and knowledge; built internal capacity; and increased our credibilityWe believe we were assured independently by someone who can verify our claims – it validated our own beliefsWe have learnt the value of qualitative indicators, to consider impact more broadly and we are now more convinced of the actual value of our programIt ensured increased funding for both programmes, internal capacity and increased our own sustainability

BeneficiariesWe had an opportunity to talk without being judged – we could be honestWe learnt to document our own work and the contribution we madeWe feel we are being trusted, being heard and someone asks our opinionWe had an opportunity to share and learn

2016/05/17

CompetitorsTransparent processCredible and verifiable process considering all stakeholders inputContributes to more efficient and integrated strategies, policies, programsContributes to industry capacity building


34The next level of impact assessments:

2016/05/17

Static Impact

No movement – no change

Changed Impact

Increased or decreased

impact

Sustained Impact

Impact validated and

confirmed over time


35Direction of impact:

Adverse or beneficial impact Do some stakeholders

benefit more than others Are there trade offs between

potential negative and positive impact

Is the impact sustainable or time bound

Will impact escalate or diminish over time

Impact manageability What will be required in future

to maintain the impact How resilient is the impact Is mitigation required to

enhance the impact How could impact be

accelerated How could vulnerability be

managed with adverse impact

2016/05/03

36Final Thoughts:

It is our opinion that the ability to quantify and qualify impact must receive much greater attention in future. It is the core of developmental work as the basic assumption is that: 1) Resources are applied 2) Activities are conducted 3) Qualitative change and impact and outcomes are the ultimate expectation that will lead to

change in a specific social context The development fundamental principle – also referred to a ‘theory of change’ is the

cornerstone of social/community development. Therefore being able to identify what changes in a developmental context is the primary reason for doing community investment and development in the first place.

The fact that both funders and intermediaries have difficulty identifying qualitative impacts indicates a lack of not only: 1) Understanding developmental principles 2) Contextualising developmental outcomes 3) Quantify and qualify developmental impacts as a result (outcome) of their own (designed and

implemented) intervention The reason why qualitative impact is the most complex aspect to measure; is quite

simply, because both intermediaries and CSI/SED program managers/practitioners are at a loss of HOW to develop and identify indicators to measure such change 2016/05/03


37

2016/05/03

Beyond Evaluations:

Key Question

What do we want to

know?

Criteria for

impact/ value of impact

What matters?

Standards and

Definitions

What would

indicate impact?

Can we define the impact and envisaged / required

Information

How will we know?

What evidence

do we need/ have?

Method

How will we

determine impact or

gather evidence?

What level of

engagement will be required?

Analysis

What impact was achieved?

What does the

evidence show?

How can it be

confirmed and

collaborated?

What tools will we use?

What skills do we need

to draw conclusions?

Synthesis and

Triangulation

So what?

Do we share the results/

outcomes

What would have

happened anyway?

Decision

Now what?

Reana RossouwNext Generation Consultants• WEBSITE: WWW.NEXTGENERATION.CO.ZA• LINKEDIN:

HTTPS://WWW.LINKEDIN.COM/COMPANY/NEXT-GENERATION-CONSULTANTSHTTPS://WWW.LINKEDIN.COM/IN/REANAROSSOUW

• GOOGLE+: TTPS://PLUS.GOOGLE.COM/+REANA ROSSOUW• PINTEREST: HTTPS://WWW.PINTEREST.COM/REANAROSSOUW/• FACEBOOK: HTTPS://WWW.FACEBOOK.COM/NEXTGENERATIONCONSULTANTS/• SLIDESHARE: HTTP://WWW.SLIDESHARE.NET/REANA1