In my program development, evaluation, and research work with small nonprofit organization in the arts, health, and the environment over the past 20 years, I’ve often had to act as the translator between nonprofit activists who “just want to get the work done” and funders who want to know what impact the proposed work will have. What seems to work for both funders and for nonprofits is the application of Evaluative Thinking (ET) to the nonprofit’s work. ET in nonprofit organizations is a pretty simple idea and the primary evaluation question is: “How can I know whether my program is on its way to being successful and how will I know what its successes are?” Answering these two questions requires only that one defines what successes or impacts one wants to achieve while it is developing and when it is mature, outlining an explicit pathway for building the activities that are likely to achieve those successes, and having a means to measure the activities and outcomes.
It also helps to have an attitude of inquisitiveness about how well things are working, getting feedback from those providing and receiving services (and from stakeholders – those with whom one works), and incorporating the lessons learned from of that feedback into changes to one’s developmental pathway or provision of services. Having an agreed-upon means to measure and interpret feedback, and other evaluation data is also important. Creating an organization in which assumptions are challenged and activities are evaluated is an important step for not only satisfying stakeholders and eventual customers, but also for assuring funders that something of value will be learned or created using their financial support.
The alternative is an organization that does not seek information about how well it’s doing, fails to challenge assumptions about its activities or objectives, and believes without question in the rightness of its work and the value of its services to others. A major problem that I see with individuals and organizations that seek to help others is that they provide “help” based on their beliefs about what help others need rather than asking others what might be helpful to them. An organization that is not self-reflective or inquisitive (evaluative thinking) runs a substantial risk of not getting ongoing support from stakeholders, supporters, foundations and other funders.
Aging in Community 