|
Session Title: Dominoes or Pick-Up Sticks? Philanthropy's Struggle to Acknowledge Complex Systems
|
|
Panel Session 878 to be held in Panzacola Section F4 on Saturday, Nov 14, 3:30 PM to 5:00 PM
|
|
Sponsored by the Systems in Evaluation TIG
and the Non-profit and Foundations Evaluation TIG
|
| Chair(s): |
| Michael Patton, Union Institute, mqpatton@prodigy.net
|
| Discussant(s):
|
| Gale Berkowitz, David and Lucile Packard Foundation, gberkowitz@packard.org
|
| Abstract:
Enticed by the "what works" movement and seduced by manufacturing's
process standardization, foundations and nonprofits have embraced
planning and evaluation tools that assume a direct and linear
relationship between their activities and their desired outcomes, just
like knocking over one domino and watching the entire string tumble in
sequence. As they deconstruct social change into bite-size projects,
foundations have come to judge success by grantees' fidelity to process
and their compliance with near-term implementation requirements. In
fact, social change plays out in real life more like a game of pick-up
sticks than knocking over a row of dominoes. Even more troubling is
that in real life players do not even take turns. Everyone is moving
sticks at the same time. In this volatile setting of complex systems,
foundations must focus less on compliance-oriented variables and devote
more energy to continual feedback, adaptive behaviors and real-time
adjustments. In this session, foundation executives and foundation
consultants will discuss reasons and remedies for the current state of
practice.
|
|
Philanthropy, Accountability and Social Change
|
| John Bare, Arthur M Blank Family Foundation, jbare@ambfo.com
|
|
The accountability movement is diminishing philanthropy's appetite for
investing in social change, as well as the nonprofit sector's ability
to execute against a social-change agenda. The rewards promoted as part
of the accountability movement favor compliance and rote behavior. An
effect of the accountability movement is that organizations are
substituting evidence of process standards for a display of value added
to society. One reason is that the tools of the accountability movement
are intended for a narrow, important function but are poorly suited to
meet the needs social-change agendas. A second reason is the trend
favoring certain types of evidence. This inhibits investment in which
these types of evidence are unlikely to surface. As a remedy,
philanthropy should adopt tools robust enough to be helpful within
complex systems. Pursuit of a social-change agenda requires attention
to risk analysis and a highly flexible nature that rewards continual
adjustments.
|
|
|
Partnerships, Complexity, and Community Change
|
| Teresa Behrens, The Foundation Review, behrenst@foundationreview.org
|
|
Understanding that the complex relationships within a community can
contribute to, or inhibit, the success of community change efforts,
many funders have turned to community partnerships to implement
initiatives. In this presentation, Behrens reviews partnerships funded
by the W. K. Kellogg Foundation over several years, discusses the role
these partnerships play in the theory of change, and the evidence about
their effectiveness. Have these partnerships really been effective?
Does measuring the effectiveness of partnerships drive us further into
the dark side of "evidence based practice"? Does requiring partnerships
violate the mandate to "do no harm"?
| |
|
Innovating Evaluation in Philanthropy
|
| Victor Kuo, WestEd, vkuo@wested.org
|
|
Industry norms for evaluation in philanthropy barely exist; various
approaches abound. Since the late 1990's, calls for evaluation in
philanthropy have ignited a frenzy of activity. Theory driven
approaches to evaluating complex social change efforts, dashboards and
performance metrics, and grantee perception studies have been launched.
Some foundations with strong beliefs in technology's hope are investing
in data systems to provide regular feedback for short and long-term
horizons. Some examples of how each approach has contributed to social
change exist. This presentation will pose reflections on the past
decade of evaluation in philanthropy from an evaluator who has served
in the evaluation function of three foundations based on the West
coast. The panelist will consider why innovative approaches to
evaluation, including evaluation of complex systems, compete for
attention. A key role of philanthropy in society is to innovate.
Looking forward, evaluators can anticipate evaluation approaches to
continue to be claimed as innovative and shared in new settings.
| |