Evaluation: Make It Meaningful and Useful

May 17, 2013
Michael Quinn Patton

Michael Quinn Patton

Don’t miss MCF’s spring issue of Giving Forum, online and in your mailbox now, for “Making Evaluation Meaningful and Useful” by Michael Quinn Patton.

He says, “High-performing organizations make evaluative thinking a way of doing business.”

He distills 40 years of experience conducting evaluation, training evaluators and writing about evaluation into three important lessons. Here’s a taste. There’s much more in the complete Commentary.

  1. Embedded Evaluative Thinking Creates Lasting Impact: Patton stresses that the first step is distinguishing evaluative thinking from doing an evaluation and says, “Evaluation is an activity that produces reports; evaluative thinking produces effective organizations.”
  2. Evaluation is a Leadership Responsibility and Function: Evaluation must not be seen as a technical or administrative function. Instead it is an ongoing inquiry into what works — for whom, in what ways and under what conditions– that must become a strategic priority.
  3. Evaluating Your Organization’s Evaluation Culture Deepens It: This step involves asking tough questions of your staff: How is evaluation viewed here? How are failures handled? What would you tell a new co-worker about how to approach evaluation?

He also shares a bit about his work over the last year with the Otto Bremer Foundation, an MCF member, as it works to embed evaluative thinking into its culture.

He mentions a set of 25 Evaluation Flash Cards that the foundation put together to summarize key evaluation concepts and their implications for grantmaking. The flash cards will soon be available on the Otto Bremer Foundation website as a resource for the philanthropic and nonprofit community. We’re anxious to see them too, so we’ll let you know when we hear that they’ve been posted.

The spring issue of Giving Forum is all evaluation, measurement and results, so don’t miss it!

- Susan Stehling, MCF communications associate


Connecting Investment With Impact

May 14, 2013

GTCUWlogoDon’t miss MCF’s spring issue of Giving Forum, online now and in your mailbox, for a look at how Greater Twin Cities United Way‘s community investment strategy has evolved over the years in “Connecting Investment With Impact.”

In the article by Brian Paulson, director of innovation strategies at United Way, you’ll learn how the organization has gone from:

  • measuring activities
  • to focusing on outcome measures and building evidence
  • to creating emerging models of systems integration through collective impact.

And, you’ll be privy to lessons learned along the way.

For the complete piece, don’t miss the spring issue of Giving Forum.

- Susan Stehling, MCF communications associate


A Quick Introduction to Philanthropy in Minnesota

May 9, 2013
MCF President Bill King on Comcast Newsmakers

MCF President Bill King on Comcast Newsmakers

If you work in philanthropy, you know it can be difficult to succinctly summarize the various foundation types, the range of corporate giving initiatives, how grantmakers determine which nonprofits to support, how individual contributions fit into the giving picture and what role MCF plays in any or all of it.

Recently, MCF’s president Bill King did this in a 4-minute Comcast Newsmakers segment.

If you know a foundation staff person who could use some information on how MCF can help them connect with other Minnesota grantmakers or someone who just wants an introduction to philanthropy in Minnesota, have them watch.

Watch the video on the Comcast Newsmakers website.

Newsmakers also airs at :24 and :54 minutes after the hour on CNN Headline News, middays Monday to Friday, and weekends during morning and early afternoon hours.

If you’re a Comcast digital cable customer, Newsmakers is also a regular feature of Comcast’s Twin Cities-based Local On Demand content. (From Comcast’s On Demand homepage, choose the Get Local tab, then the Newsmakers tab.)

Did you learn anything when you watched? Let us know what surprised you about giving in Minnesota!

- Susan Stehling, MCF communications associate


Intention and Evaluation at a Small Family Foundation

May 3, 2013

sauerDon’t miss MCF’s spring issue of Giving Forum, online now and in your mailbox soon, for a close look at how the Sauer Children’s Renew Foundation, a small Minnesota-based family foundation, is using focus and evaluation throughout its grant process to make a real difference in the community.

Here is a brief summary:

  1. Discuss indicators of success , ensuring they remain relevant, measurable and within the foundation’s control.
  2. Check each letter of inquiry for fit against the foundation’s mission, priorities and indicators of success.
  3. If it looks like a fit, request a proposal with specifics on the program and the organization’s financial health and capacity.
  4.  If that checks out, visit the potential grantee.
  5. When a grant ends, receive a final report from each grantee.
  6. Track outcomes and lessons learned.

For much more detail, see Giving Forum and ”Continual Learning Through Intention and Evaluation,” by Colleen O’Keefe, executive director, Sauer Children’s Renew Foundation.

- Susan Stehling, MCF communications associate


Cultural Competence in Site Visits and Life

May 2, 2013
guglielmoher

Rudy Guglielmo, Jr., of Youthprise and Lue Her of Otto Bremer Foundation

As part its ongoing Effective Grantmaking Series, MCF hosted Effective, Culturally Competent Site Visits.

Site visits are an excellent opportunity for foundations to connect with potential grantees and get a clearer picture of what applicants do and whom they serve. They are also a way to develop relationships, beyond the typical grantmaker/grantee dynamic.

Lissa Jones, MCF’s director of diversity, equity and inclusion, shared “Three Giant Steps to Cultural Competence.”

  1. Build your own awareness. Bias is often transferred unconsciously, so check in with yourself about your cultural biases. What, for example, did your grandfather say about the value of immigrants?  As we become aware of our biases, we can work to make more culturally-informed grantmaking decisions.
  2. Develop a way of knowing. Go to cultural events, read a community paper, check out opportunities in your neighborhood to learn about other cultures. It’s all around if you look for it!
  3. Practice, practice, practice. Develop relationships, engage in the community and realize this is a lifelong endeavor. You’ll never say, “OK, I’m done. I’ve learned it all, and now I’m culturally competent!”

Panelists for the session were program officers Rudy Guglielmo, Jr., Youthprise, and Lue Her, Otto Bremer Foundation.

youthprise

Youthprise Site Visits: Guglielmo gave examples of how to look at the sector, organizational capacity and program effectiveness with a cultural lens (put yourself in the applicant’s shoes), rather than a traditional foundation lens (develop a rationale for an investment).

A traditional lens values information veracity, research accuracy, alignment of the grantee with foundation guidelines and may involve less transparent decision-making.

A cultural lens puts cultural identity at the center of the conversation and allows for an asset-based approach with an open-ended conversation between foundation and applicant. Use of a cultural lens is not a substitute for due diligence, but it is a way to learn about an applicant in a community context. It can be an effective way to evaluate requests in areas that are traditionally hard to quantify (leadership, community organizing, youth development) and provide an opportunity to establish an ongoing relationship with a potential grantee.

Guglielmo closed with a list of learning strategies: accompany an experienced funder into the field, commit to regular visits to an organization and use the foundation’s capacity to convene and allow for peer learning. The biggest barrier to culturally competent site visits is the need to build relationships.

obf

Otto Bremer Foundation Site Visits: Her says site visits are the backbone of the Otto Bremer Foundation and a principle tenant of its work. Each visit is important in establishing or maintaining a relationship, learning about community and doing due diligence.

On Her’s first site visit with Bremer, he accompanied another program officer to “learn the ropes.” During the visit, proposal-related questions were not asked, instead the conversation focused on what was going on in the community. Trust was established and the relationship grew from there.

Culturally competent site visits are not done in isolation; they are one piece of the puzzle. Before a visit, research is done, conversations held and trust established. You have to make time to build relationships, as there is no crash course in culture.

Her ended by saying the road to cultural competence starts with one relationship, and you’re becoming culturally competent when you don’t have to think about it so much.

- Megan Sullivan, MCF operations and publications coordinator


Charitable Giving Tax Deduction Challenged by Minnesota House

April 30, 2013

capitol1aThe Minnesota House of Representatives adopted a tax bill that replaces the state’s charitable giving income tax deduction with a tax credit. Neither the Governor nor the Senate has embraced this idea in their tax plans, but MCF is working with nonprofit advocates to oppose the House proposal.

Deduction vs. Credit

Currently, Minnesota taxpayers can reduce their taxable income by deducting charitable contributions. Those who itemize on their federal taxes can deduct all of their contributions, while non-itemizers can deduct 50%.

The House plan replaces the deduction with a credit. Rather than reducing taxable income, the credit would be subtracted from the tax bill after it is calculated. Under the House proposal, taxpayers who contribute $400 or more or who give 2% of their adjusted gross income could claim the credit. The proposed changes are in Article 6 of HF677. *

Advocates for the House plan suggest the bill is a win-win: The credit would create more resources for nonprofits, while also adding $40 million in revenue to the state through tax expenditure savings.

Their theory is that tax expenditures should be used to incentivize new investment, and not to reward people for what they might do anyway, without beneficial tax treatment. It assumes that — because donors donate a similar amount to the same beneficiaries each year — the credit would encourage them to increase their giving.

Unfortunately, the House plan is not supported by any projections that giving would, indeed, increase.

Investment in Civil Society

Supporters of the House plan fail to recognize that some tax deductions exist as an expression of public values, while others are designed to promote economic activity. Alexander Reid, former counsel for the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, suggests the charitable giving tax deduction serves to acknowledge that investment in civil society is an essential, core value in democratic society. Therefore, the economic test for the charitable giving tax expenditure’s worth may simply not apply.

MCF and our nonprofit allies oppose the proposed shift from a deduction to a credit because it raises fundamental and substantial policy questions about what makes democratic society work and whether charitable giving should be taxed.

More Conversation Needed

While first floated as an idea in 2009, the House proposal to change charitable giving pretty much came from out of the blue (many think it got added to the tax bill simply to help meet revenue projections). This change affects the revenue stream of nonprofits, which make up 10% of the state’s economy and are essential to creating vital, livable communities. It merits much more deliberative analysis and conversation.

It appears Senate leaders and the Dayton administration do not have much of a political appetite to enact the House charitable giving reforms this year. But the House action clearly points to a need for partners in the state’s independent sector to lead communities in conversations about the role and future of charitable giving in Minnesota.

- Bob Tracy, MCF director of government relations and public policy

* The language in HF677 states that contributions through trusts and estates would not be eligible for the credit. MCF brought this to the bill author’s attention, and she stated this was not her intent. Should the House’s reform advance, the author intends to make contributions through trusts and estates eligible for the credit in conference committee.

This post has been updated to reflect the current location of the repeal of the charitable deduction and establishment of a tax credit in HF677.


Good Data = Better Arts Organizations

April 29, 2013

cdp1The Cultural Data Project (CDP) — now in use by 7 Minnesota-based funders and 200 Minnesota arts and culture organizations — can lead to better arts organizations. In addition, use of the CDP can help foundations and corporate giving programs streamline their grantmaking and help nonprofits better understand their programmatic and financial health.

When the CDP launched in Minnesota on June 1, 2012, MCF members The McKnight Foundation and Target were the first two Minnesota-based funders to require that grantees enter data in the CDP.

Their early and enthusiastic support has resulted in data collection from several hundred arts organizations in less than a year. And, naturally the more funders that require grantseekers to use CDP, the richer the database and its usefulness for grantmakers, grantseekers and arts advocates.

While writing an article for the spring issue of Giving Forum, online now and in your mailbox soon, I was surprised by one example of CDP data use from Michigan.

In 2012, ArtServe Michigan, Michigan’s statewide arts organization, used CDP and other data to demonstrate that for every $1 invested by the state, the arts sector contributed $51 to the state’s economy. That informed efforts to increase arts funding and led to the tripling of the budget appropriation for Michigan’s arts board.

Wow! Think what that might mean for Minnesota in a few short years.

To learn more, don’t miss “Good Data Can Create Better Arts Organizations” in the spring issue of Giving Forum.

- Susan Stehling, MCF communications associate


Are Grantmakers Supporting Nonprofit Evaluation?

April 23, 2013

Don’t miss MCF’s spring issue of Giving Forum, online now and in your mailbox soon, for answers from MCF’s research manager in the “Giving Trends” article.

giving_trends_figurea

Funders can build nonprofit capacity for evaluation — and other types of operating activities — by providing general support. However, Minnesota grantmakers continue to provide most dollars in the form of program support. 

Minnesota grantmakers allocated grant dollars like this in 2010:

  • 62%: program support
  • 20%: general support
  • 9%:   capital support

While U.S. averages looked like this:

  • 53%: program support
  • 22%: general support
  • 14%: capital support

With general support, grantmakers help nonprofits develop evaluation capacities and thereby support stronger outcomes for Minnesota communities.

For much more on the topic, please read “Giving Trends” in the current issue of Giving Forum.

- Susan Stehling, MCF communications associate


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,454 other followers