Measuring the impact and return of social and community programs

Evidence of Impact and ReturnReana RossouwNext Generation Consultants

Next Generation Consultants 2

Who we are:• Next Generation Consultants helps organisations across the African

continent to become more sustainable and have greater positive impact on the economy, society and the environment.• In the 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 Impact Investment Index™ - a methodology

that measures the impact and return on investment of social / community and enterprise development investments.

2016/05/17


What we do:• Our Context• We have developed the Impact Investment Index (III)™ in 2009. • Since then we have assessed more than R3 billion worth of social/community

and enterprise development investments. This includes more than 600 programs across 15 focus areas/investment portfolio’s.• We have conducted these impact assessments on behalf of Multinational

Funders, Corporate Donors and the Development Sector – within the mining, retail, manufacturing, government, media, communications and financial sectors.• Our work resulted in an indicator library with more than 5 000 qualitative and

quantitative indicators. We have also identified 21 dimensions of impact and more than 15 dimensions of return.

2016/05/17


What we wanted to achieve:

01/08/2013

• To provide evidence• To demonstrate performance• To prove accountability• To show program/ investment effectiveness• To demonstrate value• To contribute to sustainable development• To empower and capacitate communities

and funders• Ultimately - to alleviate, eliminate and

eradicate poverty• Develop a solution for the continent – from

the continent – reflecting the context, complexity, interconnectedness of systems and ensure capacity building across the industry


Guiding 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


How the model works:

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


Aspects of ImpactA variation of the standard Impact Value Chain

2016/05/17


Different perspective of the impact value chain:

2016/05/17

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

ortfo

lio

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)

Determining ImpactImpact Value Chain – Categories of Impact


Impact across the triple bottom line:Economic Impact

Without economic impact – hardly any social program can be proclaimed sustainable.

Example:

Job Creation/Income Generation/ savings & leverage of funds/ enterprise development and empowerment

Most programs have a ‘job creation’ aspect to it – without measuring the value/income of the jobs created –and the impact thereof most programs will remain unsustainable.

Environmental Impact

Only specific environmental programs measures environmental impact – which clearly indicates the nature/extend of unsustainable development.

Example:

Most programs consumes water, energy, emit carbons – therefore not understanding or not measuring environmental impact(soil erosion, water, energy consumption) – renders most programs unsustainable/ unbalanced.

Social Impact

It is ironic that at its core CSI/SED/ED focuses on social development – therefore not being able to measure social impact indicates a lack of strategy, lack of knowledge/lack of indicators.

Example:

Most programs must have a direct/intended outcome – to change something – social impact must measure this change i.e. increased knowledge, behaviour changes.

2016/05/17

Please see: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/measuring-impact-social-community-investment-reana-rossouw


Impact over time:Short Term

Short 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 Term

There 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


Types 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


Types of impact:

DirectThese 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.

IndirectIndirect 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


Types of impact:IntendedThis 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.

UnintendedNo 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


Types 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


Types 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


Return on investmentLearning from our experience

2016/05/17


Business value of determining ROI:Knowledge

Deep understanding of value and impact as well as risks

Comparative data – industry/sector

Insights into and across impact dimensions

Insights into stakeholder groups affected

Action

New or enhanced business decisions, practices and behaviours

Develop new products/services/markets

Changed policies, strategies and practices to increase impact and return

Report in a more credible, integrated and useful way

Results

Improved performance – profitability/competitiveness

Reduce potential risks – community activism/licencing

Cost Savings – of court cases/mitigation of risks

Enhanced stakeholder relationships

Improved licence to operate conditions

Improved trust and transparency

2016/05/17

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


Return on investment impact:Strategic AspectsSupport of corporate values and strategies

Support of sustainability strategy/programs

Support of future growth, development and market access

Operational – improved processes, systems, communication

Investor / Shareholder AspectsShare price not affected when industry or sector are targeted by activists

Rated as industry leader in Sustainability Indices

Increased investment from socially responsible investment funds

Inclusion and high ratings in awards programs

Reputation AspectsRecognition/awards

Media coverage

Increased brand awareness

2016/05/17


ROI Impact:Profit Aspects

Sales generated from programs/products

Value of new products and services generated

Increased worker productivity

Increased share price (e.g. from attention of socially-screened investment funds)

Increased sales/subscriptions/advertising

Environmental Aspects

Costs mitigated from rehabilitation

Costs saved from waste management/recycling

Carbon emissions sequestrated

Costs of fines

Sector Specific AspectsFinancial SectorEconomic 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-efficientGlobalization strategiesOpportunities to brand company through community involvementMiningIntensity of opposition Previous negative incidents Regulators’ sensitivities Compatibility with existing development Reputation of company Level of community involvement Involvement of external advocates/activists

2016/05/17


ROI Impact:Stakeholder AspectsIncreased community/government awareness/positive relationships/stakeholder relations

Decreased complaints/grievances/ activism/strikes/boycotts/negative press coverage

Cost savings/avoidance

Prevention of operational stoppages/delays

Reducing/decreasing legal costs/law suits

Support for market entry/expansion plans

Savings AspectsTax rebates received from philanthropic/ charity/social/community contributions

Saved costs of free advertising space/ shelve space received from media coverage of the CI/CSI programs

Legal fees averted (includes legal department staff time and projected billable hours from contracted firms)

Costs averted through supply chain/ customer contributions

Costs saved from overstock

Savings Aspects ContinueCrisis 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 employee turnover costs, and/or reduced absenteeism

Reduced employee training costs (e.g., through community service learning initiatives)

Reduced customer turnover

Other staff management hours saved

2016/05/17


ROI Impact:Customer AspectsSurveys indicating improved customer perceptions and impacts on shopping decisions

Sales leads generated in specific geographic or demographic markets or previously closed markets

Development/increased sales of specific products/services in targeted geographic or demographic markets

Annual brand tracking surveys indicating higher scores/ratings

Collaboration/participation/co-design of new product/service development

Greater participation/involvement/ contribution in community investment and development programs

Increased brand awareness

Increased customer acquisition/retention

Operational AspectsMitigation of operational risks (health/environment/safety)

Support and enhancement of business operational requirements (integration, skills development, etc.)

Enhanced processes and services, communication, information, grievance and complaints

Integration and alignment of divisions

Product/service testing

Research/local content/beneficiation, supplier development

Compliance AspectsBroad-based Black Economic Empowerment

Licence to operate – support/extension

SLP Mandate/Strategy / support/extension

DMR/King III/ICMM/IPIECA – Industry requirements

Approval rates/new explorations/extensions

Rehabilitation/closure enhancement/support

Drop in complaints/grievances

Global Compliance and enhanced reporting

2016/05/17


ROI Impact:Employee AspectsPositive response to utilizing volunteerism for professional development/skills development and team building

Employee surveys demonstrating that volunteer activities contribute to leadership and skills 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

Employee training programs

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 AspectsImprovement of quality of life of workers

Community job creation / empowerment

Improved stakeholder relations within the community

Poverty reduction

Enhanced recruitment and appointment

Enhanced safety and security

Increased human rights awareness – mitigation of human rights aspects

2016/05/17

Case StudiesLearning from our experience

Next Generation Consultants 252016/05/17

ED Supplier Development

Program

Supplier capacity building and access to banking services

Local Suppliers

Improved business skills and

profitability

Greater output and productivity

The economic value of increased revenue and reduced costs. The

increase in local economic output

Employees of Suppliers

Accumulation of human capital,

empowerment and self confidence

The cost of external skills courses could be used. The increase in wages resulting from greater

levels of human capital. Willingness to pay for courses

Funder increased customers

Increased BEE scorecard

Increased value (revenue and profit) and increased value of additional/new tenders

awarded

Wider Local Community

Increased welfare – i.e. lower

unemployment, improved health,

education

The value of reduction in public

expenditure on health care

services and unemployment

benefitsLocal Government

Local Economic Development

Increased rates and taxes and income


Rural electrification of village

Local businesses Greater output and productivity

The economic value of increased revenue and

reduced costs. The increase in local

economic output could be estimated with multiplier analysis

Local Students Improved quality of education, better grades

Increased wages resulting from improved

education levels

Local Households

Increased safety and security, improved and

increased access to information and

communication, and improved quality of life

Monetary value of savings

Investor/Donor

Increased publicity Value of increased publicity

Increased employee morale, participation,

skills development

Value (savings) of retained employees


Training of local

farmers

Farmers and their families

Greater output and productivity, income and

empowerment

The economic value of increased revenue and

reduced costs

The increase of local economic output could be estimated with multiplier analysis – housing, health

and education

Local Authorities

Increased tax revenue

The value of increased

income tax and export duties

Local Consumers and Communities

Improved quality and quantity of

food

The value of increased

consumption

The value of increased savings

The value of Increased quality

of life, in particular health which lead

to increased productivity

Decline in infant mortality and

maternal mortality

Improved life expectancy

Intermediary

Increased income,

increased employment

The value of

leveraged resources

Attraction of new resources/donors

Value of salaries

Value of publicity


ReportingSustainability and Integrated ReportingLack of Evidence:Impact and return in current reporting practices

2016/05/17


Evidence in reporting:Sustainability Reporting

• Companies usually focus on reporting their own performance in relation to community initiatives as opposed to what changes or benefits occur for people and the environment as a result of their activities.

• Thus, it is often difficult to paint a picture of community impact based on the information in the reports. Additionally most information in reports are quantitative figures as opposed to qualitative data that reflects actual changes or impact occurred.

• The majority of companies emphasize their positive contributions without mentioning any negative impacts. Those who do report their negative impacts mostly focus on environment related problems.

• While there are differences between different topics being reporting on, there is limited ability to break down performance and impact in relation to region or operation.

• Fifty percent of companies reporting on topics such as Philanthropy and Charitable Giving, Community Services, Employee Volunteering and Cause Related Marketing do not indicate general approaches, policies or goals behind activities.

• Sections of the reports with a ‘community focus’ more often focus on topics related to charity and philanthropy than sustainable community development where issues related to the local economy, the local environment and society and the business itself are taken into consideration.

• Information related to Community Environmental Impact due to Operations and Community Environmental Campaign/Problem Solving is most frequently located in the Environmental section of the report.

• Information related to Direct Economic Impact and Helping Local Business/Producers is often placed in the Economic section of reports.

• There are differences in reporting patterns between sectors. For example Community Engagement and Dialogue appears to be an important topic in the mining sector where 90 percent of the sector’s companies report on these issues. For the chemical sector, only 20 percent of the companies report on this.

2016/05/17


Sustainability Reporting:• Top 3 indicators for Education and Training

• Number of people benefited/reached by the education initiatives

• Amount of money invested/donated in the education initiatives

• Number of education-related activities (e.g. seminar, classes, conferences etc.) held

• Top 3 indicators for Philanthropy and Charitable Giving • Sum of money donated/raised/contributed to community

initiatives • Percentage or number of people (organizations)

granted/sponsored/supported/covered by the donated services

• Number or quantity of scholarships/material/services donated (no value of money indicated)

• Top 3 indicators for Community Services and Employee Volunteering • Number of people/organizations/projects benefited, served

or implemented • Number of volunteers • Number of volunteering hours

• Top 3 indicators for Total Community Expenditure • Amount of money spent in community investment • Percentage of profit/revenue/income spent in community

investment • Percentage increase of money spent on social investment,

compared to last year • Number of people benefited in community investment

activities • Number of projects developed and completed

• Top 3 indicators for Community Engagement and Dialogue • Number of visitors, audience and participants reached • Percentage/number of sites where community engagement

activities were performed • Frequency of meetings

2016/05/17


Integrated Reporting:

2016/05/17

Input

• How much money + other resources was spend

Activities

• What happened as a result of invested resources• Seed funding 3

businesses• Build a school

Output

• Detail of interventions• 2 Suppliers

business development courses

• 2 Suppliers seed/grant funding for machines

• 2000 Senior Secondary School Students

Outcome

• Improved our supplier network

• Achieved our BEE Scorecard Points

• Contributed and enhanced our corporate citizenship

• Number of entrepreneurs

• Number of students

• Increased pass rates

• Anecdotal evidence – few pictures

Impact

• Nothing on economic value created apart from cost/input resources

• Nothing on social value created – either qualitatively or quantitatively

• Nothing on positive or negative impact – improved/enhanced impact or diminished value or trade offs

Return

• Nothing on benefits gained from investments• Contributes to

our future sustainability


In ConclusionWhat we have learnt

2016/05/17


What our clients say:FundersIt provides validation of investment decisions

Opportunities for increased partnerships and collaboration

Contributes to better financial, project and risk management/reporting

Contributes to learning, capacity building and better results (impact)

The outcome of the process informs sustainability and integrated reports

The detailed stakeholder engagement process provide insight never documented or previously considered in evaluations

The 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 process

The process have added value to our own work – especially M&E and reporting practices

The processes have increased our effectiveness and own performance; increased our learning and knowledge; built internal capacity; and increased our credibility

We believe we were assured independently by someone who can verify our claims – it validated our own beliefs

We have learnt the value of qualitative indicators, to consider impact more broadly and we are now more convinced of the actual value of our program

It 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 honest

We learnt to document our own work and the contribution we made

We feel we are being trusted, being heard and someone asks our opinion

We had an opportunity to share and learn

2016/05/17

CompetitorsTransparent process

Credible and verifiable process considering all stakeholders input

Contributes to more efficient and integrated strategies, policies, programs

Contributes to industry capacity building


The 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


Impact: Thinking beyond evaluations:

2016/05/17

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?

Please see: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/grantmaking-getting-right-indicators-measure-success-reana-rossouw


Reana RossouwNext Generation Consultants

• Website: www.nextgeneration.co.za

• Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/company/next-generation-consultants and https://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

2016/05/17