|
Session Title: Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder: Rationalizing Evaluation Needs Amongst Foundation Boards, Staff, and the Nonprofits They Fund
|
|
Panel Session 723 to be held in BONHAM B on Saturday, Nov 13, 8:00 AM to 9:30 AM
|
|
Sponsored by the Non-profit and Foundations Evaluation TIG
|
| Chair(s): |
| Charles Gasper, Missouri Foundation for Health, cgasper@mffh.org
|
| Abstract:
Beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder. Increasingly, funders are asking their grantees to conduct evaluations. What constitutes these evaluations varies from funder to funder and is driven often by the interests and experience of the staff of foundation. Board members also bring their own concerns and interests to bear and their concepts of truth and justice can greatly impact the questions asked and the methodologies used to support them. However, the nonprofit often has its own culture around evaluation and strategic learning and its needs can differ from those of the funder. This panel will present a foundation’s Board, staff, nonprofit leader’s positions and perceptions of a quality evaluation and the experiences of an evaluation contractor and foundation’s Director of Evaluation in rationalizing these viewpoints to provide a quality evaluation to all concerned stakeholders.
|
|
The Director of Evaluation: Part Negotiator, Part Salesman, Part Educator, Part Evaluator, and 100% Facilitator
|
| Charles Gasper, Missouri Foundation for Health, cgasper@mffh.org
|
|
The Director of Evaluation position in a foundation is one of finding the balance between the needs of the foundation and the needs of the grantees. The presenter will provide lessons learned in balancing those needs, including interventions such as education of the stakeholders, setting appropriate expectations, developing a supportive policy for evaluation, development of requests for proposals for evaluation, and assessment of respondent proposals.
|
|
|
The Vice President for Program: Looking for Impact, But Also Looking to Learn Lessons That Can Be Applied to Other Initiatives
|
| Martha Gragg, Missouri Foundation for Health, mgragg@mffh.org
|
|
The Vice President for Program position is often concerned that the programs funded are achieving their objectives. However, the Vice President is also interested in learning about the process of programs and identifying ideas that can be spread to other programs and initiatives funded by the foundation. The presenter will share how the questions that develop into those lessons are identified as well as what is done with the lessons learned. Further, the presenter will share how they help educate the Board on the needs of the organization around evaluation.
| |
|
The Director of a Foundation: Strongly Interested in Knowing If the Funding Has Made an Impact, but Open to Learning More From Evaluations
|
| George Gruendel, Missouri Foundation for Health, eggruendel@accubak.net
|
|
Directors of Foundations are primarily interested in impact. "Did we move the needle" is a common phrase uttered by someone in this position. The presenter will share their observations of their peers as well as their own around evaluation. Additionally, the Director will share their experience with education in evaluation conducted by the Director of Evaluation for the foundation as well as through presentations made by contractors to the Board of Directors.
| |
|
The Contractor in the Middle: Balancing the Needs of Different Organizations to Meet the Needs of All the Primary Stakeholders
|
| Carol Brownson, Washington University in St Louis, cbrownso@dom.wustl.edu
|
|
So you got the contract to conduct an external evaluation of an initiative for a foundation. You are working with foundation staff and their grantees to get useful information to everyone, develop and implement technical assistance for the grantees that helps them with their internal evaluation as well as supports the questions you need to ask on behalf of the foundation. The presenter will share experiences and lessons learned balancing these needs and wants as well as their own education of foundation staff and nonprofits around the practicalities of a quality evaluation.
| |