Desired Outcome: Realistic Outcomes Measures
By Michaela
October 2, 2006Alana Conner Snibbe recently wrote an interesting article, “Drowning in Data,” published in the fall issue of the Stanford Social Innovation Review. She argues that foundations have gotten so consumed with the desire to “measure outcomes” that they have forgotten just how difficult and expensive it is to do so.
It is refreshing to read an article urging a reality check on this trend.
How often has a nonprofit received a modest grant and then been asked to provide outcome data in an effort that would consume more time and money than is available to conduct the project for which funding was granted?
I am the last person to argue against trying to measure the impact of our work, but I agree with Snibbe that the effort needs to be scaled to the resources available and to the ability to measure the outcomes.
For example, it is a lot easier to measure the outcome of cataract surgery, than to assess the real impact of a delinquency prevention program.
In the first case, every patient who regains full vision is counted as a success, and the measurement of full vision is pretty simple.
In the second example there are many variables in an at-risk youth’s life that can impact the outcome it is striving to achieve (that is: staying out of trouble). The program may only be designed to address a few of these variables, and cannot be held accountable for all the other variables involved. While it is not impossible to measure the result of a particular delinquency prevention intervention, it is often very difficult and relatively expensive.
The struggle goes on. Somehow we must balance the nonprofit’s need to focus on its programs with the legitimate need of all involved — the nonprofit, its funders, those it serves, and its many other stakeholders — to know if its programs are effective.
Please share your thoughts on how the sector can achieve this outcome.
Tags: nonprofit