Speaking at EES: Understanding European Evaluative Perspectives

Ivanhoe Development (ID) remains focused on serving communities in the United States. However, the opportunity to learn about global evaluative perspectives is an invaluable addition to our work.

ID was invited to speak at the European Evaluation Biennial Conference in Italy this year. We presented a session entitled “Program Maturity: How Grants, Evaluation, and Design Intertwine.” It detailed our holistic approach to nonprofit development and the resource constraints that face resource-limited, community-based organizations (CBOs). Our interactions with this global community identified some evaluative barriers that exist regardless of geography. They include:

1. Evaluative Brevity: 

Survey fatigue remains an insidious issue within the evaluative space. Whether it involves asking Syrian refugees about their safety concerns or measuring economic growth from cash transfer programs in Malawi, surveys remain tedious and taxing, resulting in low data quality and transactional interactions with community members. At ID we have two standing surveying rules: 1) a survey’s length can always be cut by 20%, and 2) survey brevity respects our participant’s time and expertise. We believe that creating efficient, time-effective evaluative tools is a mechanism of respect.

2. Financial Catalysts: 

Money often drives the quality and depth of evaluation, forcing organizations to  compromise their goals or tool diversity to complete projects. Within our context, most CBOs may only spend 3-5% of their annual budget on evaluation. The solution is not to simply bemoan a smaller budget. At ID, we have a two-fold approach: 1) advocate to funders about the importance of evaluative activities and the need to provide specific funding for them, 2) create tools that can perform “double-duty” to gather quality evaluative data and also serve to support other activities as needed. 

3. Qualitative Appreciation: 

No matter where you are, numbers have historically been prized within the evaluative context. “Clear-cut” data and “more rigorous” quantitative methods have always taken center stage. While numbers do provide incredibly useful information, trends, and patterns, they do not tell the whole story. Qualitative methods such as storytelling, photovoice, and interviewing are gathering momentum (please note that these methods have been used to make decisions since the dawn of time, but within the Western context, these “tools” are relatively new) due to their low barriers to entry and freedom of expression. 

ID continues to hold to our most central value: humility. We remain lifelong learners and deeply respect our evaluation peers and clients. Our team looks forward to applying what we have learned to our everyday work. 

To check out our work, please see examples here or information about our training series here.

Building Economic Models: A Week of Progress & Innovation

Hello, I'm Connor Liebman, a Data Analyst at Ivanhoe Development. I'm excited to share with you some of the innovative work we've been doing in economic modeling. At Ivanhoe, we've been working hard to refine our economic models to better serve our clients. Our goal? To provide tools that demonstrate the fiscal impacts of programs and highlight the significant savings and positive community impacts.

Let's take a look at what we've accomplished this week.

The Foundation: Consistent Templates

We started by developing a consistent template for our economic models. This template is the backbone for all our economic models, ensuring uniformity and ease of comparison. Here's what we've included:

1. Fiscal Impact Analysis: This section quantifies the financial implications of running various programs. We assess costs, revenues, and net fiscal impacts, clearly showing a program's financial performance.

2. Program Savings: Here, we highlight the direct and indirect savings the programs generate. This includes cost savings from preventive measures, efficiency improvements, and reduced dependency on public services.

3. Community Impact: Beyond the numbers, we emphasize the broader positive impacts on the community. This includes improvements in health, education, and overall quality of life.

Scenario Comparison: Showcasing Value

A key feature of our models is the ability to compare scenarios with and without our client's involvement. This comparative analysis underscores the value added by our clients' programs, offering a compelling narrative for stakeholders and funders.

1. Baseline Scenario: We establish a baseline that depicts the current state without the program's intervention. This serves as a control, allowing us to measure the program's true impact.

2. Intervention Scenario: We then model the scenario with the program in place. This includes all anticipated financial and non-financial changes resulting from the program's implementation.

3. Impact Assessment: By comparing these scenarios, we can quantify the program's effectiveness and demonstrate how our clients' initiatives lead to tangible improvements and cost savings.

Customization for Clients: Flexibility Meets Consistency

While consistency is critical, we also recognize the need for customization. Each client has unique needs and operates in different contexts. Our models are designed to be flexible, allowing us to tailor them to specific client requirements. This week, we've enhanced this flexibility, ensuring our templates can easily accommodate various program types and community contexts.

By developing consistent, customizable, and impactful economic models, we empower our clients to demonstrate their value clearly and convincingly. We're excited about these refined models' potential to help our clients achieve their goals and make a positive difference in their communities.

As we refine our approach, we can't wait to see the real-world results these models will help our clients achieve. And speaking of real-world applications, let me give you a sneak peek into how we're putting these models into action.

Putting Our Models to Work: 

Our recent work has focused on developing two key types of economic models that demonstrate the power and versatility of our approach:

1. Public Service Cost Analysis Model: This model aims to provide detailed cost estimates for public service responses to various community situations. It breaks down expenses into personnel time, equipment usage, administrative costs, and support services. By offering a comprehensive view of operational costs, this model helps public agencies understand the financial implications of their services and identify areas for potential cost savings or resource optimization through nonprofit outreach programs.

2. Health Services Impact Model: We've developed a model that analyzes the economic impact of expanding primary care services to underserved populations. This model projects potential cost savings by comparing preventive care expenses against those of emergency services. It also has long-term benefits such as improved chronic disease management, reduced hospitalizations, and increased productivity. The goal is to demonstrate how investing in accessible healthcare can bring significant economic benefits and improved community health outcomes.

Why Program Evaluation is Crucial for Nonprofit Success

Evaluation can be daunting. The process encompasses practices ranging from simple attendance logs to multi-year, mixed-methodological approaches. At Ivanhoe Development, we strongly believe that a well-developed evaluation plan can be the difference between assumption-based programming and true solidarity work. Let's explore why:

1. Demonstrating Impact:

Program evaluation serves as a powerful mechanism for nonprofits to share the difference they make. By assessing and quantifying outcomes, organizations can provide evidence of their impact, instilling confidence in the community, stakeholders, donors, and internal staff.

2. Improving Program Effectiveness:

The adage "what gets measured gets managed" holds true in the nonprofit sector. Evaluation allows organizations to identify strengths and weaknesses in program implementation. This can help identify strategic adjustments that can enhance overall program effectiveness.

3. Enhancing Accountability:

Nonprofits are entrusted with a profound responsibility to their beneficiaries, donors, and the public. Through program evaluation, organizations establish a framework for accountability. Transparent assessments enable stakeholders to track the efficient use of resources and hold nonprofits accountable to the promises they make.

4. Informing Decision-Making:

Community-informed decision-making is the cornerstone of successful nonprofits. Regular evaluation equips organizations with the insights needed to make decisions about resource allocation, program modifications, and future planning. 

5. Attracting and Retaining Donors:

Donors, whether individuals, governmental bodies, foundations, or corporations, seek assurance that their contributions are making a genuine impact. Program evaluation provides compelling narratives of success. 

6. Fostering Innovation:

Program evaluation can be a catalyst for innovation. By listening to stakeholders and evaluating programs in meaningful ways, surprising information can sometimes come to light. Programs do not always have the exact impact that was intended, and that’s ok! Identifying areas for improvement or adjustment can lead to new approaches, technologies, or partnerships, fostering a culture of innovation.

Comprehensive, mixed method program evaluation is the foundation that elevates nonprofits from good to exceptional. Beyond being a funder reporting requirement, it is a strategic tool that fuels growth, instills confidence, and ensures that nonprofits are not just fulfilling their missions, but doing so in the most impactful and efficient ways possible. Ivanhoe Development staff undergo a process of continued education in evaluation best practices and methods to help your organization work in partnership with the community you serve. 

Money Talks: Why Grant Funders Need to Know Your Nonprofit's Financial Story

“So they need my 990, an audited financial statement, a project budget, a funding history, AND a profit and loss statement??’ 

The amount of financial information requested by potential grantors can often feel overwhelming or perhaps even invasive. It can also feel like a power imbalance, providing detailed information on your organization’s finances is overwhelming and may open an organization to scrutiny or judgment.

There are a lot of forms or policies to unearth and format, dates to check, and numbers to input. So why do grantors ask for all of this information? 

1. Building Trust and Credibility:

Grant funders seek partnerships with organizations they can trust. Transparent financial information serves as a cornerstone in establishing credibility. When potential grantees willingly share comprehensive financial details, it signals a commitment to openness and accountability. This trust is the foundation of a strong, collaborative relationship that can be leveraged into future funding

2. Strategic Decision-Making:

Grant funders are strategic investors. They aim to allocate resources for the greatest impact. Access to detailed financial data equips funders with the insights needed to make informed decisions. Understanding an organization's financial health helps funders assess its capacity to execute and steward proposed projects effectively and sustainably.

3. Ensuring Financial Stability:

Grant funders are not only interested in the immediate impact of their support, but also the long-term sustainability of the initiatives they fund. By scrutinizing financial information, funders can evaluate an organization's financial stability, ensuring that it can weather challenges and continue its mission beyond the grant period.

4. Demonstrating Accountability:

Nonprofit organizations are accountable to their community, and grant funders are a crucial part of this equation. When organizations willingly share financial information, they showcase a commitment to accountability. This transparency assures funders that their resources will be used responsibly and in alignment with the intended goals.

5. Aligning with Funder Priorities:

Grant funders often have specific priorities and goals they aim to address through their philanthropic efforts. Financial information allows funders to assess whether a potential grantee's objectives align with their own. This alignment enhances the likelihood of successful collaboration.

6. Mitigating Risk:

Every investment carries an inherent level of risk. Grant funders aim to minimize this risk by making informed decisions. By reviewing an organization's financial history and practices, funders can identify potential risks and work collaboratively with grantees to implement risk mitigation strategies. 

While it may feel annoying or like overkill, the call for financial transparency from potential grantors is not a mere formality. For a funder, it is a strategic and important step that underlines the shared commitment of both grant funders and nonprofits to create lasting, positive change. Grantors are often faced with hard choices between many deserving, meaningful project or program requests. They must make decisions with limited information. Being able to showcase your organization’s financial literacy and stability can be the key to ensuring that grantors view you as a trusted partner.

One of Ivanhoe Development’s commitments is to challenge existing philanthropic systems to ensure transparent, and barrier-free funding for organizations. We recognize that for many organizations, this level of financial transparency and reporting places a burden on staff. We continuously work with funders to restructure reporting practices and appropriately question the balance between necessary financial transparency and burdensome requirements that do not directly facilitate an organization’s access to funding. This continues to be a work-in-progress for the philanthropic community.  

Commission isn’t for us.

When a nonprofit seeks to increase its funding portfolio it can be daunting. How much to spend on development services can leave a senior leadership team or Board of Directors feeling overwhelmed. It may feel as though hiring a consultant or writer is flushing money down the drain. What if the grant isn’t won? What if our consultant leaves without notice? Who do we trust? How to we minimize risk?

We understand the reasoning behind commission. When you win your consultant or writer wins, it mitigates risk for your organization if things don’t pan out. However, Ivanhoe Development staff feel strongly that commission-based work tends to encourage applications that focus more on grant size rather than fit.

In many traditional grant writer or consultant relationships individuals are simply concerned with getting money through the door, as they should be, we need funds to continue our work. BUT there is so much more that needs to occur after a grant award, organizations must be able to responsibility steward the funds, have internal management processes, and staff capacity to complete outcomes. We work to design and evaluate great programs, not funnel funds into outcomes that do not benefit communities.

BIG money isn’t always good money. Ivanhoe Development seeks funds with intentionality, not only looking at how likely an organization is to win an award but also what is the internal capacity to MANAGE it. We are not concerned with what fees we may receive if you win, we are concerned about the sustainability of your funding portfolio.