When people hear that we spent several weeks this spring evaluating real social enterprises for a $150,000 prize, the first question is usually: “Wait – as students?” Yes, and this is how it works.
The F.M. Kirby Impact Prize awards $150,000 annually to a social enterprise with proven impact and a credible path to scale. The organizations that compete for this prize are doing some of the most ambitious work in the world, like improving maternal and child health outcomes in low-income countries, expanding access to higher education through innovative financing models, building sustainable agricultural systems for smallholder farmers, developing clean energy solutions for communities without reliable electricity, or strengthening local governance so that public institutions can better serve their people.
Through the Kirby Prize Lab, Fuqua’s Center for the Advancement of Social Entrepreneurship (CASE) places a cohort of students directly inside the evaluation process. We read multi-phase applications, conduct due diligence interviews with founders, and present investment recommendations.
Before touching a single application, we trained hard. We studied rubrics designed to bring structure and fairness to a process that could easily go sideways. We practiced recognizing bias — beauty bias, affinity bias, halo and horns effects — all of which show up when you are reviewing pitch materials and interviewing charismatic founders. We debated what “scaling impact” really means: not just growing headcount or revenue, but deepening and broadening the change you are trying to make in the world.
One of the biggest mindset shifts was learning an asset-based approach to diligence. Instead of hunting for flaws to knock candidates out, we were asked to see strengths and possibilities first, to approach interviews with humility and genuine curiosity. That is harder than it sounds when you are trained to poke holes.
Kyleigh: The Kirby Lab was my favorite experiential learning at Fuqua! This lab gives us the tools we need to have an enriching experience evaluating international enterprises. I enjoyed being in a cohort that is genuinely interested in the subject matter and willing to put in the time to dig into the applications. The scope of the project is clearly defined and effectively executed.
The Kirby Lab furthered my interest in working within organizations focused on evaluating impact because of how inspired I felt learning about the solutions presented through this competition. I am more confident about my ability to evaluate enterprises in both the for- and non-profit spheres based on the training we received. The CASE team offered excellent insights that grounded us in the evaluation framework and highlighted outstanding elements among the applicants.
Olivia: My biggest takeaway from the Kirby Lab was how much more complex grantmaking is than it appears from the outside. Applications rarely capture the full picture. Additional context and the right questions can significantly shift how an organization is understood. It also highlighted how difficult it is to compare organizations that are all doing meaningful impact work. In many cases, the final decision is not about one organization being more impactful than another, but about which one best aligns with the grantor’s priorities.
Eli: I came to Fuqua for experiential learning — and while that often means traveling abroad or landing the right internship, the Lab delivered it at Fuqua. The structure was encouraging, giving us purpose-built rubrics for every stage, building interview guides, and actually interviewing founders. It’s hard to replicate that in a classroom.
Aniedi: Kirby Lab made the idea of impact feel real to me. Instead of just talking about organizations in class, we were reading their work, asking hard questions, and thinking about what they need to grow. It was a meaningful and concrete way to learn, and I felt trusted with real responsibility.
Lola: The Kirby Prize Lab reinforced the importance of remaining open-minded about what “counts” as scale and impact. While measurable metrics matter, some transformative outcomes, such as conflict reduction in communities, trust-building, and social cohesion, are harder to quantify. Therefore, effective funders should balance rigor with contextual understanding to avoid disadvantaging socially complex interventions that resist clean measurement.
Ash: One of my biggest takeaways from the Kirby Prize Lab was thinking more deeply about proximity and how nuanced people’s connection to a cause can be. I also left realizing that impact organizations have to be tech-first and operationally strong to truly scale. It’s not about your “shiny project” — it’s about being “in the muck” building systems that deepen impact and stay true to the work.
Some MBA learning happens at a comfortable distance from the real thing, but the Kirby Lab collapses that distance. While some students are writing a memo about what a funder should do, this experience added real stakes to our work, with all the ambiguity and tension that comes with it.
How do you balance rigor with not overburdening organizations that are already stretched thin? How do you hold a rubric in one hand and genuine human judgment in the other? How do you evaluate an enterprise on a non-linear, “zig-zaggy” path to scale, when most good ones are? There are no clean answers. That is the point.
If you are a first-year wondering what to prioritize, or an admitted student trying to understand what makes Fuqua distinct, this is part of the answer. The Kirby Prize Lab is the kind of experience you will still be talking about in job interviews years from now — because it asked you to show up, think hard, and actually mean it.
The post What It Actually Means To Invest For Impact: Inside the Kirby Prize Lab appeared first on Duke Daytime MBA Student Blog.
More...
How does this impact your International MBA decision?
I'd be glad to learn your thoughts on this story : What It Actually Means To Invest For Impact: Inside the Kirby Prize Lab
The F.M. Kirby Impact Prize awards $150,000 annually to a social enterprise with proven impact and a credible path to scale. The organizations that compete for this prize are doing some of the most ambitious work in the world, like improving maternal and child health outcomes in low-income countries, expanding access to higher education through innovative financing models, building sustainable agricultural systems for smallholder farmers, developing clean energy solutions for communities without reliable electricity, or strengthening local governance so that public institutions can better serve their people.
Through the Kirby Prize Lab, Fuqua’s Center for the Advancement of Social Entrepreneurship (CASE) places a cohort of students directly inside the evaluation process. We read multi-phase applications, conduct due diligence interviews with founders, and present investment recommendations.
What We Actually Learned
Before touching a single application, we trained hard. We studied rubrics designed to bring structure and fairness to a process that could easily go sideways. We practiced recognizing bias — beauty bias, affinity bias, halo and horns effects — all of which show up when you are reviewing pitch materials and interviewing charismatic founders. We debated what “scaling impact” really means: not just growing headcount or revenue, but deepening and broadening the change you are trying to make in the world.
One of the biggest mindset shifts was learning an asset-based approach to diligence. Instead of hunting for flaws to knock candidates out, we were asked to see strengths and possibilities first, to approach interviews with humility and genuine curiosity. That is harder than it sounds when you are trained to poke holes.
Voices from the Cohort
Kyleigh: The Kirby Lab was my favorite experiential learning at Fuqua! This lab gives us the tools we need to have an enriching experience evaluating international enterprises. I enjoyed being in a cohort that is genuinely interested in the subject matter and willing to put in the time to dig into the applications. The scope of the project is clearly defined and effectively executed.
The Kirby Lab furthered my interest in working within organizations focused on evaluating impact because of how inspired I felt learning about the solutions presented through this competition. I am more confident about my ability to evaluate enterprises in both the for- and non-profit spheres based on the training we received. The CASE team offered excellent insights that grounded us in the evaluation framework and highlighted outstanding elements among the applicants.
Olivia: My biggest takeaway from the Kirby Lab was how much more complex grantmaking is than it appears from the outside. Applications rarely capture the full picture. Additional context and the right questions can significantly shift how an organization is understood. It also highlighted how difficult it is to compare organizations that are all doing meaningful impact work. In many cases, the final decision is not about one organization being more impactful than another, but about which one best aligns with the grantor’s priorities.
Eli: I came to Fuqua for experiential learning — and while that often means traveling abroad or landing the right internship, the Lab delivered it at Fuqua. The structure was encouraging, giving us purpose-built rubrics for every stage, building interview guides, and actually interviewing founders. It’s hard to replicate that in a classroom.
Aniedi: Kirby Lab made the idea of impact feel real to me. Instead of just talking about organizations in class, we were reading their work, asking hard questions, and thinking about what they need to grow. It was a meaningful and concrete way to learn, and I felt trusted with real responsibility.
Lola: The Kirby Prize Lab reinforced the importance of remaining open-minded about what “counts” as scale and impact. While measurable metrics matter, some transformative outcomes, such as conflict reduction in communities, trust-building, and social cohesion, are harder to quantify. Therefore, effective funders should balance rigor with contextual understanding to avoid disadvantaging socially complex interventions that resist clean measurement.
Ash: One of my biggest takeaways from the Kirby Prize Lab was thinking more deeply about proximity and how nuanced people’s connection to a cause can be. I also left realizing that impact organizations have to be tech-first and operationally strong to truly scale. It’s not about your “shiny project” — it’s about being “in the muck” building systems that deepen impact and stay true to the work.
Why This Feels Different
Some MBA learning happens at a comfortable distance from the real thing, but the Kirby Lab collapses that distance. While some students are writing a memo about what a funder should do, this experience added real stakes to our work, with all the ambiguity and tension that comes with it.
How do you balance rigor with not overburdening organizations that are already stretched thin? How do you hold a rubric in one hand and genuine human judgment in the other? How do you evaluate an enterprise on a non-linear, “zig-zaggy” path to scale, when most good ones are? There are no clean answers. That is the point.
If you are a first-year wondering what to prioritize, or an admitted student trying to understand what makes Fuqua distinct, this is part of the answer. The Kirby Prize Lab is the kind of experience you will still be talking about in job interviews years from now — because it asked you to show up, think hard, and actually mean it.
The post What It Actually Means To Invest For Impact: Inside the Kirby Prize Lab appeared first on Duke Daytime MBA Student Blog.
More...
How does this impact your International MBA decision?
I'd be glad to learn your thoughts on this story : What It Actually Means To Invest For Impact: Inside the Kirby Prize Lab