Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Results-Based Accountability (TM) for Vermont Food Systems
Similar to Results-Based Accountability (TM) for Vermont Food Systems (20)
More from Lauren-Glenn Davitian
More from Lauren-Glenn Davitian (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Results-Based Accountability (TM) for Vermont Food Systems
- 1. Results-Based AccountabilityTM for Vermont Food Systems October 7, 2013 Anne Lezak, Coordinator BBVT Acknowledgements to Amy Carmola-Hauf, United Way of Chittenden County and Trying Hard is Not Good Enough, Mark Friedman
- 2. 3 kinds of performance measures RBA 2 kinds of accountability 7 questions from ends to means 2-3-7
- 3. Different Levels of Focus = Different Levels of Accountability 1. Population Level Focus - well being of population Collective accountability: Many partners are responsible for achieving the desired result 1. Program (Strategy) Level Focus - well being of program participants/ service recipients Program accountability: Program is responsible for its performance
- 4. Population/Community Focus Questions to Ask • What do we want? Clean Environment • How will we recognize it? % of days with clean air % of stream miles meeting water quality standards % of solid waste going to landfills • How are we doing now? • Who are the partners? • What works? • What do we propose to do? RESULT A condition of well-being for children, adults, families or communities as a whole INDICATOR How we measure this condition
- 5. 5 Criteria for Choosing Indicators Communication Power •Does the indicator communicate to a broad range of audiences? Proxy Power •Does the indicator say something of central importance? Data Power •Are there quality data available on a timely basis?
- 6. F2P Goal 9 The Majority of Farms will be Profitable • What do we want? RESULT VT Farmers operate profitable farms • How will we recognize it? • How can we measure these conditions? INDICATOR % change in Gross Farm Income, Production Expenses, Net Farm Income % change in net farm income % change in number of farms Rate of farm employment Rate of gains and losses by scale of farm operation
- 7. How Are We Doing Now? Baseline & story behind the baseline Key Indicator: Vermont Aggregate Gross Farm Income, Production Expenses, and Net Farm Income
- 8. Population/Community Focus: Questions to Ask, Cont. • Who are the partners? • What works? • What do we propose to do?
- 9. 9 RESULT: What we want STRATEGY 1 Who? What? For whom? STRATEGY 2 Who? What? For whom? STRATEGY 3 Who? What? For whom? OTHER INFLUENCES Indicator: • How we measure it • Baseline & trend data Performance Measures: • How much? • How well? • Anyone better off? Performance Measures: • How much? • How well? • Anyone better off? Performance Measures: • How much? • How well? • Anyone better off?
- 10. 10 How well? Is anyone better off? # People served # Hours of service # Activities (by type of activity) Participant satisfaction Use of best practice Staff qualifications/trainin g External review Change in skills, knowledge, attitude, behavior, circumstance, well being Possible sources: program records, participant survey, external data Program Performance Measures How much?
- 11. 11 How well? Is anyone better off? # outlets approached by category # of farms in program # of hours marketing # of website hits % of current outlets refer us to peers % targeted outlets contacted % of contacts meet with us # and % of farms selling to new outlets # and % of farms increasing sales dollars to outlets with whom we matched them # and % of farms selling new products to outlets Program Performance: Food Hub Marketing How much?
- 12. 12 Acknowledgements & Resources Fiscal Policy Studies Institute Santa Fe, New Mexico www.resultsaccountability.com www.raguide.org Trying Hard Is Not Good Enough: How to Produce Measurable Improvements for Customers and Communities, Mark Friedman Amy Carmola, Ph.D. Director, Community Impact & Volunteer Mobilization United Way of Chittenden County .
Editor's Notes
- Accountability: 2 Levels (why important to make distinction/see that line – common mistake of being held accountable in wrong way!!!) Stop here – or maybe sooner – and talk about ‘what does it mean to be “accountable?” Not solely responsible, but that this is how you ’ll evaluate your performance as a program. “We are accountable for figuring out how to make this happen (this ABO). If it’s not happening, that means WE need to do something differently.” Need a good example here about how a POP Level indicator would NOT affect how you run your program. We can talk about Impact/Measurement/Evaluation at TWO different levels – and the implications of these two levels, in terms of what you measure, what you hope to achieve, and how you interpret the data, are very important 1. Community- level impact means looking at the well being of a community population Acknowledges that many partners, many strategies contribute to (are accountable for contributing to) community-level outcomes, and the well being of population This is the appropriate level of focus for a community collaborative, a group of partners working together to achieve a common goal This is not the appropriate level of focus for an individual program or strategy. Example: High school achievement (SAT scores for a specific school/community/area). Program level impact – focus = well being of people you serve Gathering data to see how program participants benefit from the program/service This is the appropriate level of focus for an individual program, agency, organization, strategy Example = teen tutoring program data might be the grades of the kids in the program (going up?) So important distinction = appropriate accountability SWITCH TO NEXT SLIDE
- This isn ’t the ONLY way, but we’ve found it to be the best way for these reasons. Goal = common approach among all of us, and this does that VERY well. So that’s why we’re talking about RBA. (not because I work for RBA) Starting point with this work = ENDS (we need a common approach) and RBA = MEANS. ENDS first, then MEANS – emphasize this more, we talk about what we DO or our inputs, but it ’s really about the ENDS, we should always start there! (And that’s the conversation boards, staff, RD people need to be having always, starting with ENDS)
- These are criteria for choosing OR prioritizing indicators Always needs some back up data to help tell the story behind the data WORKSHEET #2 See next slide for an example of indicator that meets all three criteria
- This chart shows in detail the different types of measure we often use in each cell, and the measures that go with the three basic categories of performance measurement. “ How much? ” These are the program outputs – documenting the amount of work accomplished What ’ s the best way to report? What do you already report/track? What information gives the best evidence of the SCOPE of your work? “ How well? ” How can this be measured? (see examples) “ Is anyone better off? ” How do program participants ’ lives or conditions improve? Almost always focusing on participants/clients here (although can also consider additional “ anyone, ” such as taxpayer cost savings, or general public safety) Let ’ s go through some (many) examples…
- This chart shows in detail the different types of measure we often use in each cell, and the measures that go with the three basic categories of performance measurement. “ How much? ” These are the program outputs – documenting the amount of work accomplished What ’ s the best way to report? What do you already report/track? What information gives the best evidence of the SCOPE of your work? “ How well? ” How can this be measured? (see examples) “ Is anyone better off? ” How do program participants ’ lives or conditions improve? Almost always focusing on participants/clients here (although can also consider additional “ anyone, ” such as taxpayer cost savings, or general public safety) Let ’ s go through some (many) examples…