|
Grantee-Foundation Evaluation Policy: Waltz or Breakdance?
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Ann McCracken,
The Health Foundation of Greater Cincinnati,
amccracken@healthfoundation.org
|
| Abstract:
Ten years ago The Health Foundation of Greater Cincinnati, a conversion foundation, began a dance with regional health non profits. Evaluation, like funding, capacity building, and communications were braided into the granting process to ensure that grantees were successful. In a recent survey of grantees, 90% of the Foundation start up and expansion grants continued when funding ended. One grantee noted, “The Foundation’s emphasis on evaluation pushed us toward excellence and accountability—we became more sophisticated in our work.” This session will explore some of the critical policy junctures that determine if evaluation is a “part of”, or a “part from” grantmaking. Some of these junctures include: the carrot or the stick; evaluation or research; foundation or grantee needs; grantee capacity or objectivity; logic models for show or use; aligning grantmaking and evaluation; and the critical role of evaluation in sustainability.
|
|
Integrating Evaluative Inquiry into the Work of Private Foundations: A Case Study of a Hybrid “Retainer" Model
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| William Bickel,
University of Pittsburgh,
bickel@pitt.edu
|
| Jennifer Iriti,
University of Pittsburgh,
jeniriti@yahoo.com
|
| Catherine Nelson,
Independent Consultant,
catawsumb@yahoo.com
|
| Abstract:
Evaluation has an important role in supporting foundation learning and knowledge production. Yet foundation policies vary considerably in how evaluative inquiry is operationalized in their organizational routines. Some have substantial evaluation departments, some outsource specific evaluation contracts, many do no evaluation (Bickel, Millett, Nelson, 2002). This paper describes a hybrid, multi-year “retainer model” wherein a foundation established an on-going partnership with a university-based research and evaluation project. The goal of the experimental partnership is to provide responsive evaluative resources to the foundation while benefiting from long-term knowledge of the foundation’s organizational routines and priorities. Working on evaluation, strategic planning, and grantee and foundation capacity building functions, the partnership attempts to combine the advantages of having inside relationships and knowledge, while maintaining external objectivity and resource flexibility. The paper describes the nature of the partnership work and advantages and challenges to this approach to integrating evaluative thinking into foundation practice.
|
|
The Role of Evaluation within Foundations: Which Eggs to Put in the Basket?
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Erin Maher,
Casey Family Programs,
emaher@casey.org
|
| Susan Weisberg,
University of Washington,
weisberg@u.washington.edu
|
| Abstract:
Casey Family Programs is a foundation whose mission is to provide, improve, and ultimately prevent the need for foster care. Casey Family Programs is different from the majority of other large foundations in two ways—it is an operating foundation (i.e., it directly conducts activities and provides services that align with its mission) and it houses an internal research and evaluation department. This paper describes the function and purpose of evaluation within the organization and how priorities for evaluation are set in the face of increasing demands for accountability and the information needs of the child welfare field. We also describe the structure of our evaluation unit including the development and maintenance of a Constituency Research Advisory Team (CRAT) consisting of representatives from our key constituent groups: foster care alumni, birth parents, and foster parents. We will provide examples of several evaluation projects to illustrate our priorities, the role of the CRAT in advising our research projects and findings, and the different functions of different types of evaluation within our organization.
|
| | |