UWGA IMPACT FUND ASSESSMENT TOOL

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "UWGA IMPACT FUND ASSESSMENT TOOL"

Silvia Reynolds
5 years ago
Views:

Agency Name: Program Name: Strategy: UW Staff: Volunteers: Site Visit Date: Site Visit Location: This assessment tool is used as part of the United Way of Greater Atlanta Impact Fund investment

1 Agency Name: Program Name: Strategy: UW Staff: Volunteers: Site Visit Date: Site Visit Location: This assessment tool is used as part of the United Way of Greater Atlanta Impact Fund investment process as a method of evaluating programs that have submitted applications for funding. The Impact Fund Assessment tool includes criteria from four main categories identified by the UWGA board and Community Engagement Council. Each category has specific criteria used for the assessment. AGENCY LEVEL CATEGORY 1. Organizational Strategic Direction and Leadership (10 points) Highly competitive organizations will be able to demonstrate that they have a clear and actively used strategic plan that is supported by the organization's leaders. Criteria in this category focus on providing volunteers with a clear context for the program for which funds are sought. PROGRAM LEVEL CATEGORIES 2. Results and Capacity to Measure (50 points) Highly competitive programs will have a demonstrated track record and the internal capacity to achieve meaningful results, clear methods to measure results, and internal processes where data is used to make program improvements. 3. Program Quality and Program Operations (30 points) Highly competitive programs will be able to demonstrate that the program design and quality of the services are based on research about effective programs. Criteria in this category emphasize delivery of high quality services, adaptability based on participant needs and demographics, and an overall ability to create and leverage partnerships that get results. 4. Program Budget (10 points) Highly competitive programs will be able to demonstrate that the overall budget and the United Way portion address the barriers to achieving and are able to ensure that UWGA dollars will influence other to co-invest in effective programs. Page 1 of 15

2 Organizational Strategic Direction and Leadership - there are 2 key criteria in this section and 10 Organizational Strategic Planning Section C. Not able to demonstrate that there is a current strategic plan Unable to demonstrate at least one example of how the strategic plan has been used to make decisions May have one or more project specific plans, but lacks a cohesive, specific, agency-wide strategic plan Existing plans developed with little involvement from staff from different levels within the organization. Unable to demonstrate that board members were involved. Able to demonstrate one example of how the strategic plan has been used to make decisions Has an agency-wide strategic plan, but it is vague or non-specific about goals & objectives Strategic planning carried out infrequently, but the agency does have a proposed date in the next year to begin strategic planning process Able to demonstrate that internal staff leaders were involved in the development of the strategic plan, but the process did not involve board members Able to demonstrate two examples of how the strategic plan has been used to make decisions, but is unable to show that it is referenced regularly Board utilizes an implementation/operational plan to stay informed on organization progress annually. Has an agency-wide strategic plan that is concrete, realistic, and detailed Strategic planning carried out regularly. Able to demonstrate recurring planning process Able to demonstrate that internal staff leadership as well as board volunteers were involved in the development of the strategic plan Board utilizes an implementation/operational plan to stay informed on organization progress quarterly 1 4 Page 2 of 15

3 Board Involvement & Support Section D. Board members are not informed about major organizational matters Board members provide informal direction, support, and accountability to leadership Board members largely provide feelgood support Board does not assesses its performance One or two board members are informed about all critical matters in a timely manner Board members provide periodic direction, support, and accountability to staff leadership Input is solicited from only a few board members on a regular basis Unable to demonstrate efforts that encourage meaningful involvement from all board members Policies and practices exist to encourage active involvement from all board members, no term limits for board members Board informally and inconsistently assesses its performance Board members provide regular direction, support, and accountability to staff leadership Input is solicited from some board members on a regular basis Policies and practices exist to encourage active involvement from all board members including limits on the number of consecutive terms a board member may serve Board annually assesses its performance and the President/Executive Director using clear and consistent tools and/or guidelines All board members are fully informed about all critical matters Board members provide regular direction, support, and accountability to staff leadership; Input is solicited from all board members on a regular basis Board members have the skill set/background that supports the organization's strategic goals Board evaluates its performance against the goals and uses the lessons learned to develop plans to improve board effectiveness Formal assessment results in a clear plan for improvement; board collectively owns the topic of improving its value to the organization Organizational Strategic Direction and Leadership - Subtotal of 10 Page 3 of 15

4 Results and Capacity to Measure - There are 6 key criteria in this section and 50 Clear Program Purpose with Organizational Support Program does not have a clear purpose, outcomes and target group Program services are scattered or inconsistent and not fully integrated into clear strategy Program lacks clear alignment with mission and overarching goals of the organization Program has a clear purpose but has not defined outcomes and target group Program services are somewhat scattered and not fully integrated into clear strategy Program is loosely linked with mission and overarching organization goals Program has a clear purpose and defined outcomes and target group Program services are well defined and tied together through a logic model and integrated into clear strategy Program is aligned with mission and overarching organization goals Meets the first three criteria for level three Program is one of a few central/core programs offered by the organization to achieve its mission and goals 2 8 Page 4 of 15

5 Target Populations Section M. Less than 25% of participants are from a target population Services are not targeted to target populations Program staff do not understand the needs of the target populations Less than 25% of participants are from a target population Some services are targeted to target populations Some program staff understand the needs of the target populations The program does not receive feedback from target population and cannot demonstrate response to changing needs of population 25% - 49% of participants are from a target population All services are targeted to target populations Most program staff understand the needs of the target populations The program receives feedback annually from target population, but the program should be more responsive 50% or more of participants are from target populations All program staff understand the needs of the target populations Program staff receives ongoing feedback from target population and is able demonstrate adjustments have been made to address specific needs of target populations 2 8 Page 5 of 15

6 Previous Performance (Last Year) Results Summary Document There is no evidence that the program summarizes outcome data The program did not submit required reports to United Way on time The program did not meet targets last year and DOES NOT have a reasonable explanation (reached less than 70% of target) The program summarizes outcome data only 1 time a year and submitted yearend report to United Way last year; compared to 2 years of data The program did not meet targets last year (reached 70-84% of target) but DOES have a reasonable explanation The program summarizes outcome data only 1 time a year and submitted year-end report to United Way last year; compared to 2 years of data The program was slightly below targets last year (reached 85% - 94% of target) but DOES have a reasonable explanation The program demonstrated there is a clear methodology for how targets are set The program summarizes outcome data only 1 time a year and submitted year-end report to United Way last year; compared to 2 years of data The program met targets last year. (reached 95% - 100% on all indicators) OR If the program exceeded targets of 120% or higher - The program staff are able to explain or justify why the program has exceeded the targets The program demonstrated there is a clear methodology for how targets were set 2 8 Page 6 of 15

7 Current Performance (Mid-Year) Results Summary Document Program is behind compared to last year and does not have the ability to meet targets by year-end Includes: 1) lack of understanding about challenges or barriers why they exist 2) limited or insufficient resources, training, or staffing to address challenge 3) non-specific/uncertain about steps needed to address or overcome challenges Program is behind compared to last year but has a reasonable plan for meeting targets by year-end Program is in the same position as last year and has a reasonable plan* for meeting targets by yearend Includes: 1) clear understanding of why 2) and use of data, processes or other reliable information to develop the plan 3) resources (training, staffing, etc) to implement new plan 4) adequate monitoring in place to provide sufficient warnings Program is exceeding compared to last year and plans to meet/exceed their targets by year-end OR Program does not collect data at mid-year but has a track record of exceeding their targets by year-end 2 8 Page 7 of 15

8 Projected Performance (Next Year) Results Summary Document Target Projections for next year have not been set for all of the required indicators Targets Projections for next year have been set for all of the required indicators There is no justification for the Target Projections provided Target Projections are not aligned with the dollars requested and program budget Targets Projections for next year have been set for all of the required indicators There is a reasonable justification for Target Projections (It is reasonable to believe that the program can achieve the projections) Target Projections are not aligned with the dollars requested and program budget Targets Projections for next year have been set for all of the required indicators There is a reasonable justification for Target Projections. (It is reasonable to believe that the program can achieve the projections) Target Projections are aligned with the dollars requested and program budget 2 8 Page 8 of 15

9 Program Adaptability and Use of Data for Learning Organizational leaders and Board members (including Board level subcommittees) do not typically see evaluation or performance data Program is not able to provide examples of how performance data was used to make improvements or guide strategic decisions Organizational leaders and Board members (including Board level subcommittees) review performance data once or twice a year Program is not able to provide examples of how performance data is used to make improvements or guide strategic decisions Organizational leaders and Board members (including Board level subcommittees) review performance data quarterly Program is able to provide only one example of how performance data is used to make improvements or guide strategic decisions Performance data is focused on short term results (ex: a single quarter, month or year) and may focus solely on successes Organizational leaders and Board members (including Board level subcommittees) review performance data monthly or bi-monthly Program is able to provide multiple examples of how performance data is used to make improvements or guide strategic decisions Performance data is used to critically examine long term (ex: trends over multiple years) results both successes and challenges Staff is proactive in building their own capacity to understand and use data by participating in trainings, webinars, and/or networks [Example(s) provided] Results and Capacity to Measure Subtotal of 50 Page 9 of 15

10 Required Program Components Section E. Program Quality and Program Operations - there are 5 key criteria in this section and 30 Program does not meet any of the required strategy components Program meets a few required strategy components Program is missing a very important required component Program demonstrates implementation of all required components Program demonstrates implementation of all required components Program demonstrates an internal process for regularly reviewing quality standards and ensuring highest services are delivered (licensing, accreditation, certification, etc.) Preferred Program Components Section E. Program does not meet any of the preferred strategy components Program meets a few preferred strategy components Program demonstrates implementation of all preferred strategy components Program demonstrates implementation of all preferred strategy components Program demonstrates effort to implement innovative best practices from within their field (i.e. cutting edge) Page 10 of 15

11 Research Based Model Section G. Program is unable to demonstrate the model or research used to support the overall approach Program has no track record Program has a logic model, but is unable to show the research that supports this logic model Program activities are based solely on limited past implementation Program staff is unable to explain why this is the best model to guide their work Program has a clear researchbased logic model to guide program activities Program has long track record of implementation Program staff are able to explain why this is the best model to guide their work Program has demonstrated all three criteria from level three Program has external assessments or evaluations that support their success/achievements and has consistency in implementing the model 1 4 Page 11 of 15

12 Partnerships & Alliances Section H. Program is unable to demonstrate how they partner with other nonprofits, the for-profit or public sectors Program demonstrates efforts to seek out new partnerships but relies mostly on a few long term relationships Program able to demonstrate referral or transactional partnerships that require minimal coordination (light touch, networking, informal, does not require sharing of resources) Program is able to demonstrate multiple partnerships that have helped in advancing the goals of the program Program demonstrates efforts to seek out new partnerships and has been successful in forming new partnerships towards their goals Program is able to demonstrate partnerships that require planning and coordinated action Program has demonstrated all three criteria from level three Program demonstrates that there is data sharing (how data is used) and regularly reflection on lessons learned among the partners Page 12 of 15

13 Volunteer Management Section I. No defined roles for volunteers to fill No active recruitment of volunteers (only passive recruitment such as people who walk in the door) Volunteer roles involve a range of time commitments and skill levels Volunteer work is mostly task-oriented Some active recruitment of volunteers Wide range of volunteer roles available Active recruitment of volunteers on a regular basis Written job descriptions for most common volunteer positions Some systems exist to track and manage volunteers Volunteer recruitment systems successfully fill appropriate roles in program Written job descriptions for all volunteer positions Robust volunteer management systems in place Volunteer recognition takes place on a regular basis 1 4 Program Design & Quality - Subtotal of 30 Page 13 of 15

14 Budget Alignment to Priorities Section K. Program Budget - There are 2 key criteria in this section and 10 Budget narrative does not clearly support the program budget Program is unable to provide a clear rationale/need for the amount requested from United Way Program is unable to provide a clear explanation of how dollars from other funders will be utilized Budget narrative is clear but does not align to program budget Program is able to provide a clear rationale/need for the amount but it does not align with funding request Program is able to provide a clear explanation of how dollars from other funders will be utilized Budget narrative is clear and align/supports the overall program budget Program clearly describes how United Way funds will be used to advance the program s goals and outcomes Program is able to provide a clear explanation of how dollars from other funders will be utilized Program is able to demonstrate commitments from other funders Program has demonstrated all three criteria from level three Program clearly demonstrates how the United Way portion of the budget is necessary for program implementation and can specify the impact if request is not met Program has a plan in place to address budget gaps and potential revenue losses from other sources Page 14 of 15

15 Ability to Leverage UW Funds Section L. Program budget included zero or minimal funding from other sources Program received funding from other sources, but it is not related to the United Way funding Program able to demonstrate that it used status as a United Way grantee in its fundraising materials (i.e. event signs, letters to donors, etc.) Program able to demonstrate that UW Impact Fund grant is specifically used to secure matching dollars from other funding source(s) 1 4 Program Budget - Subtotal of 10 TOTAL POINTS FOR ALL SCORED CRITERIA 100 Page 15 of 15

Demonstrates strong alignment of vision, mission, strategic plan, programs and partnerships. Demonstrates moderate reach of

Demonstrates strong alignment of vision, mission, strategic plan, programs and partnerships. Demonstrates moderate reach of 1. Organizational alignment with Great Families 2. Reach of current aligned programs (e.g., number of people/families served, geographic area(s) served, etc.) 3. Outcomes of current aligned programs Section