Social investment funds (SIFs) have emerged in recent decades to showcase public sector interventions’ impact and social value. This chapter examines the argument, paradoxes, and constitutive effects of SIFs as an evaluation logic within the Swedish public sector. The chapter contends that SIFs align with various social impact measurement methods, drawing on data from a multi-site case study, emphasizing accountability by assessing how investments foster social impact and inform stakeholder decision-making. However, expenditures are often deemed justifiable only if they promise a financial return rather than contributing to the overall quality of life. This evaluation approach reflects a knowledge transfer model that struggles to meet modern expectations for evaluation as an objective and impartial truth-telling process. This result leads to a potential symbolic nature of SIF evaluations.