Oh multitude of non-profit organizations,
services for homeless and centers for education,
They say we should evaluate you
but are telling us your financials just won't do.
There seems to be no effective way
to evaluate the use of money we pay.
Do we count the number of programs you run
or how many kids come to you for their fun?
Should we check your 990 even though its confusing
but even then, it's mostly financials we are using.
We could look into your annual report
but the numbers there you can also distort.
Maybe we should look at practices or collaboration
or how you compare with others around the nation.
We can look at how you understand diversity
or have you evaluated by a university.
We can make graphs or charts
or look at where your impact starts.
Or maybe whether or not you're "green"
because that is also a popular scene.
There seems to be no best way
to evaluate all of the charities today.
Until we are able to better understand,
it seems financial reports maintain the upper hand.
After looking at the articles for this week, it seems to be more information or ideas on the same question - how can we effectively evaluate the work of non-profit organizations, and is it possible at all? In searching for different kinds of charity evaluations, I stumbled upon , which uses a variety of approaches to evaluate several charities in the Seattle area. The site allows donors to select an area of interest, such as education, the arts, community development, or basic needs, and investigate organizations that are involved in those activities or services. The foundation does not give the organizations a scored rating like Charity Navigator, but does provide a program overview, limited financial statements (perhaps a good thing?), and then an evaluation. In the evaluation section, organizations have several facets listed - although no organization is evaluated on all of the elements. These facets include an explanation of how an organization incorporates best practices, collaborates with others, demonstrates proven success, maintains financial health, appreciates diversity and cultural competency, and engages in strong leadership and sustainability practices. I liked this approach because, although organizations are not evaluated on all facets (most will have 3 or 4), there is information about how the organization responds to each element, rather than a simple number which defines success. In all of the reading we are doing it seems that there are several approaches to attempting to evaluate effectiveness, but that there is not a clear way to do that which can be used for different types and sizes of non-profits, hence the lovely piece of poetic art above.
Kristen,
ReplyDeleteNice poetry display! Funny enough though, every part of it raises valid questions. It is very difficult to grasp the idea of what is the true measure of effectiveness. I agree with you that 990's are not the tell all of an organization. And for those with little financial experience, it probably means even less.
I truly believe that in the grand scheme of things, if an organization is utilizing social media, serving the people that need to be served, actively looking to make improvements, fiscally responsible and maintain a transparent environment, then that is effective. However, there seems to be so much more than that based on all the different types of evaluations that are available.
Agreed! Those are some nice rhymes! If you’d like, I can write some pleasant chords over the verses and we can all have a sing-a-long, perhaps during the last merged public administration/social work class. We just need a catchy chorus. Then we can add this song with a dozen or so unwritten tunes to the official Spring 2011 CCPA soundtrack as a fundraiser for next year’s Philanthropy Incubator. An idea!
ReplyDeleteI agree with Matt’s vision of effectiveness including a variety of factors, though I find many of the factors as very much intertwined. For instance, the use of social media may reinforce an agency’s transparency and responsiveness. My biggest contention is the difficulty associated with evaluating whether an organization is “serving the people that need to be served.” For some organizations, we may find greater ease in assessing this variable, such as in the case of a community-based hunger relief organization which perpetually has enough foodstuffs (and variety too!) for its target population (assuming that this hypothetical organization’s mission pertains to continually and satisfactorily feeding its target population – but how full should the recipients be? Just a little full? Quasi full? Completely full? Thanksgiving full?). For a multitude of organizations, this evaluation is likely much more complex.
I do not mean to degrade any list, as I cannot come up with an exhaustive list of factors to determine any given nonprofit’s level of effectiveness (that is to say that effectiveness denotes a level, such as a percentage). I will need to give this much more thought, as our assignments require that we define and compare organizations’ effectiveness. Defining and comparing an immeasurable concept…
We will have to do the best we can.
Kristen, awesome poem. And I agree with everyone above concerning the myriad of ways, measures, and means to evaluate accountability and effectiveness. It all seems a bit overwhelming and intimidating, especially considering our hope to contribute to nonprofits in the future. But hopefully, a complex understanding of accountability, effectiveness, and impact will help us to better develop our own "toolbox" (forgive my Scott Page reference).
ReplyDelete