1. Reasonable ROI Tracking – Measuring Internal and External Impact Marie Beason Indiana Grantmakers Alliance

2. Section I: Introduction

3. Thesis of the Presentation Expectations for companies as responsible corporate citizens are rising, and stakeholders are demanding results. Clearly defined goals with strong social impact makes for a more compelling story to tell your stakeholders, resulting in greater impact for the business.

4. Telling a Compelling Story All of your stakeholders need some level of information.. the “story.”

5. Section II: Key Issues

6. Why Measure? Increasing Expectations Internal and external stakeholders are demanding more “results” Companies are expected to help address issues, not just give money Employees expect their company to be a leading corporate citizen Community Leaders expect a commitment to the community Customers/Clients expect a company to meet standards Competitive Advantage Most companies measure only outputs, not outcomes Most companies are unable to articulate how CI affects their business (reputation and/or employee recruitment, retention, morale, etc.) Trend is toward defining specific goals for major programs; opportunity still exists to be a leader in an industry or geographic area Program Improvement Findings can be relevant, timely and useful

7. Which Programs Need to be Measured? ProgramContentResources Signature Program: Teacher Training in Grand Ville Targeted support of teachers in 3 public schools in poor communities $100,000 annually 50 volunteers Employee contributions Major Focus Areas: Education, Social Services Support of critical needs in education and social services in Grand Ville $75,000 annually Business / Client-Driven Support for events, organizations based on client requests to sales reps around the country $25,000 annually Employee Engagement (Volunteerism, Dollars for Doers, Matching Gifts, etc.) Support for matching gifts and dollars for doers $50,000 annually APC focuses primarily on its headquarters community and where its employees live and work

8. Multiple Stakeholders with Varying Needs for Results InternalExternal Stakeholders (Internal, Regional, & Local) Employees CEO/Board/Foundation Board Senior Mgmt/Executive Team Other Departments Business Units Domestic/International Offices Shareholders Business Partners Key Opinion Leaders (Influencers) Community Partners Grantees Consumers The “Field” General Public Expectations Business Impact – Reputation; Employee Involvement/Pride – Retention, Recruitment, Morale Business Alignment/CSR Integration Continuous Improvement, Learning about Best Practices Social Impact Community Expectations Transparency Social Impact – addressing issues of concern, which will vary by geography and by stakeholder Companies need to identify priority stakeholders, issues of concern to those stakeholders and then determine level of measurement needed for each stakeholder

9. Barriers to Measurement Different programs have different expectations of “results”; lack of internal consensus on what to measure Portfolio of programs – major initiatives require more rigorous outcomes measurement Limited budgets or support for deep measurement and evaluation Most companies have not engaged senior management effectively to gain support for increased measurement Limited internal knowledge/capacity regarding measurement and evaluation Most companies have limited staff and do not have the capacity or knowledge to measure their programs

10. Section III: Defining Measurement

11. vs. ReactiveProactive How Can Measurement Data Be Used?

12. What Can Be Measured?Inputs Monitoring: What is the quantity and quality of the resources we have invested in this program? Are they aligned with our program goals? Performance measurement: What is the quantity and quality of the products or services we have delivered? Outputs Outputs Outcome measurement: What are the results for participants, grantees, employees, the business, and other stakeholders? Outcomes Impact study: What are the social and larger business impacts attributable to the program/ company? Impact

13. Methods of Measurement Monitoring Performance measurement Outcome measurement Impact study DocumentingResearch Tracking investment and progressDetermining causality Minimum evaluation expertise requiredHigh level evaluation expertise required Low costHigh cost

14. Strategies for Measurement Low-Cost Strategies Develop a program model with clear and measurable goals Ensure that program vision, goals and objectives align Focus on measuring inputs and outputs Create a tracking system to regularly monitor and report progress (inputs and outputs) Medium-Cost Strategies Develop a program model with clear and measurable goals Create a measurement framework that lays out key measurement questions, indicators, data sources, data collection methods Focus on measuring inputs, outputs and short-term outcomes Utilize data collection tools that have been developed or could be developed easily Create a tracking system to regularly monitor and report progress Higher Cost Strategies Develop a program model with clear and measurable goals Hire an external measurement expert to design data collection plans, systems and tools Provide PD for grantee’s internal staff around data collection and measurement Fund peer-to-peer exchanges re: measurement

15. Section III: Defining Your Approach

16. 1. What Can Be Measured?Inputs All the resources needed to support a program: People Dollars Marketing Lines of business The specific activities and/or programs that serve a particular target audience: Signature programs Focused giving Employee engagement activities Outputs Outputs Affects on target audience: Community awareness, perception of company Grantee knowledge, attitudes, behaviors Employee morale, retention, engagement, team work, leadership, productivity Outcomes The long-term and aggregate effect of the program on overall target audience and the company: Social impact Business impact (Reputation among key stakeholders) Impact

17. 3. What Level of Information Is Needed? Signature Major Issue or Focus Area Giving Business-Driven Giving Employee Programs Programs Inputs Outputs Short-term Outcomes Long-term Outcomes Impact

18. Levels of Information Needed by Stakeholders ProgramContent Key Stakeholder(s) Reached Level of Information Needed SignatureFocusedAll Impact; Long-term outcomes Major Issue or Focus Area Giving Focused on several issues Regional Stakeholders; Community Partners; Employees Outputs; short-term outcomes Local Area Giving Broad: based on local needs Local community leaders, employees Inputs and outputs, some short-term outcomes Client-Driven Giving Broad: based on client requests Clients, Business Partners Inputs Employee Programs Broad: based on employee interests and company priorities Employees, Community Partners Varies by program; primarily inputs and outputs, some short-term outcomes

19. 3. What Tools Can Be Used to Measure? In House: Financial databases/reporting HR surveys and data (recruitment, retention, morale, productivity, performance) Gifts databases Grantee reports Line of Business systems and reports Existing data (consider marketing and sales information) Media Hits Consumer data External: Document/File Review Surveys Interviews Focus Groups Core Capacity Assessment Tool (CCAT)

20. ProgramContentResources Level of Measures Measurement Tools Signature Program: Teacher Training in Grand Ville Targeted support of teachers in 3 public schools in poor communities $100,000 annually 50 volunteers Employee contributions Outcomes Teacher survey Employee survey Media hits Major Focus Areas: Education, Social Services Support of critical needs in education & social services in HQ community $75,000 annuallyOutputs Financial databases Gifts database Grantee reports Client-Driven Support for events, organizations based on client requests $25,000 annuallyInputs Financial databases Employee Engagement (Volunteerism, Dollars for Doers, Matching Gifts, etc.) Support for matching gifts and dollars for doers $50,000 annually Outputs - Outcomes Financial databases HR, survey Media hits How to Measure… An Example: APC

21. 4. What Resources Do You Currently Have or Can You Leverage? Skills and resources (Also consider other departments) People (time and expertise) Money Technology Partners Leadership Existing data/ tools (Also consider other departments) Marketing reports Demographic analyses Community data, reports Company culture HR data Department data Broader context

22. 5. Who Participates in Measurement?Measurement Community Stakeholders, Grantees, Volunteers C-Suite Executives Senior Leaders and Managers Community Involvement Staff Implementer / Coordinator Reviewer Recipients of Findings

23. 6. How Much Will It Cost? Monitoring 1 – 2% Performance measurement 3 – 5% Outcome measurement 5 – 10% Impact study 10% +

24. Outcomes StrategiesInputs The key “learning- based” question 7. Evaluating Your Program Which resources were most important for providing “high- quality” service? Which strategies (program qualities) were most important for achieving the desired outcomes (including business outcomes)? What was the quantity and quality of the resources we used to implement our programs? How much service did we provide and what was the quality of that service? How were our employees involved (to what extent, in what ways)? Did our business or employees change? Did our service recipients change? If so, how much and in what ways? The key “learning- based” question

25. Key takeaways Maximize the resources you already have People (time and expertise) Money Technology Partners Leadership Existing data/ tools (Program participation, Program Reach, Marketing data, Company data, local data about the region and community) Leverage the resources of other departments HR Marketing Select your measurement level based on your resources, the program you want to measure, and the type of information you need for your targeted audiences

26. Resources CEP website (foundations and strategy reports): www.effectivephilanthropy.org/index.php?page=publications www.effectivephilanthropy.org/index.php?page=publications DHFS Evaluation Resource Guide. Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services. Office of Strategic Finance Evaluation Section. Updated June 2006. http://dhs.wisconsin.gov/aboutDHS/OPIB/policyresearch/EvaluationResourceGuide06-06.pdf http://dhs.wisconsin.gov/aboutDHS/OPIB/policyresearch/EvaluationResourceGuide06-06.pdf Diversity in Philanthropy website: www.diversityinphilanthropy.org/news/case_studies/pdfs/DPP-Evaluation-Case-Study2.pdf www.diversityinphilanthropy.org/news/case_studies/pdfs/DPP-Evaluation-Case-Study2.pdf Davidson, Jane. ‘Evaluation Methodology Basics: The Nuts and Bolts of Sound Evaluation’: www.sagepub.com/authorDetails.nav?contribId=532276www.sagepub.com/authorDetails.nav?contribId=532276 GEO website (see report on Foundations and Evaluation and the Change Agent Project): www.geofunders.org/publications.aspx www.geofunders.org/publications.aspx Joint Committee on National Standards: www.jcsee.orgwww.jcsee.org Kellogg Foundation Program Evaluation and Logic Model Manuals: www.wkkf.org/~/media/475A9C21974D416C90877A268DF38A15.ashx www.wkkf.org/~/media/475A9C21974D416C90877A268DF38A15.ashx Mertens, Donna; and Ginsberg, Pauline. The Handbook of Social Research Ethics: www.sagepub.com/refbooksProdDesc.nav?prodId=Book230293 www.sagepub.com/refbooksProdDesc.nav?prodId=Book230293 RWJF Evaluation Series: http://www.rwjf.org/files/research/50349.quality.checklist.final.pdfhttp://www.rwjf.org/files/research/50349.quality.checklist.final.pdf