Likely, you have seen, or have been affected first hand by the work of youth development organizations in your community. Think of your local girl scouts troop, the Boys and Girls Club you went to after school, or the summer camp your sister attended. These organizations are important to the communities and children they serve. However, it is crucial for these organizations that they prove they are working. It is a waste of resources to invest in a program that is not achieving the outcomes planned.
In order to improve programs and demonstrate success, nonprofits must collect data. These objective, data driven measures of an organization’s impact are known as performance measurement. The separate effort to manage and make use of the information generated from performance measurement activities is known as performance management.
In the nonprofit world, collecting meaningful data can be complicated. The distinction between these two concepts is important in understanding organizational evaluation, as it can be difficult for nonprofits to effectively utilize data collected through performance measurement in performance management systems.
Not all organizations revisit the data they collect, many leaving it as untouched computer files. When organizations use their data as part of a performance management plan, they analyze it, draw conclusions, and change their programs in response. The data informs them on ways they can better serve their community.
Five youth development nonprofits in Monroe County were interviewed in order to determine the characteristics of effective performance measurement systems in this subsector of nonprofit organizations. While a limited sample, the data from these interviews provided valuable information on what types of measures youth development organizations think are important, how mandated data collection affects organizational decision-making, and how job structure can create a top down emphasis on evaluation and data analysis. The organizations that were more likely to use performance measurement in their strategic thinking showed that evaluation means more than collecting data. Nonprofits must show a commitment to continuously improving their performance measurement systems in order to better serve the youth in their community.
The four greatest takeaways from these interviews are:
- Organizations must collect as many measures as possible! There is a significant amount of scholarship stressing the importance of using multiple measures to create a full picture of organizational effectiveness. Respondents from the five organizations all supported this in their discussion. More data helped them identify avenues for improving their programming. Additionally, it gave them more information to satisfy the diverse goals of stakeholders.
- The data indicated a correlation between having a staff member or team dedicated to performance measurement and the use of it in organizational decision making. The three organizations where the respondent’s job title dealt with data and performance measurement appeared to use these systems more in organizational decision making. It was clear that organizational motivation to use data comes from a top down approach. Having an individual on the executive staff who is consistently working to build a culture of evaluation helps this.
- Organizations spend a lot of time trying to get frontline staff to care about data. And guess what? They do not succeed! Scholars and practitioners believe that having an organizational wide appreciation of performance measurement leads to better performance management systems. While it may improve the use of data in decision making, it is not necessary. All five organizations interviewed were actively using data in decision making despite a lack of understanding from their frontline staff.
- Finally, organizations may find data collection mandates to be a chore, but in the end, they help the nonprofit. As one respondent said “we are lean and mean,” and having to add in surveys to meet grant requirements takes time away from their other responsibilities. Despite this, organizations comply because they need the funding. Even if staff are annoyed, these mandates positively impact the organization by making their collection practices more routine and forcing them to collect data they otherwise would not.
Measuring outcomes for children can be complicated. Yet, creating programs that support the youth in our communities is so important. Children are a vulnerable group, and when they receive data driven programming that is proven to create positive outcomes, that can make a world of difference. This difference not only manifests in children’s lives, but in society as a whole. Youth development nonprofits advocate for kids who will one day be adults, and if they have been a part of meaningful programming, they will likely grow up to be better citizens.
Ryan Paquette is a senior at the Indiana University O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs.
Leave a Reply