Outcomes
There are a few different outcome development models around. Many of these models tend to focus on program outcomes - very few on organizational outcomes; however, I think the organizational outcome is the most important.
The most read statement in an agency's brochure is the mission statement. In a mission statement you define who the need is for, what the need is, why it is important and how you will meet the need and in some cases where the agency is located.
After reading a mission, most funders want to know how:
What are you trying to achieve and are you achieving it?
Organizational outcomes are about answering the above questions. On the other hand, program outcomes just tell you about the various pieces and whether they are or are not working. You may have some programs that are very successful and others not so. So what? This doesn't make you as accountable to your funders because piecemeal results don't tell funders whether overall your clients have achieved what you have stated in your mission.
Organizational outcomes, if properly measured, will also keep you constantly reviewing your organizational alignment. Checking alignment will keep you focused on offering programs or services that are aligned with your mission. Everything is integrated.
Something to think about!!
Labels: NGO, non-profit, outcomes
Contributing Members of Society
Many non-profit agencies struggle with understanding outcomes and how to implement them within their own agencies. Sometimes, agencies look to other agencies or consultants to develop their outcomes for them. This can be more harmful than helpful, but I won't get into that discussion at this time. Instead, I want you to think about how you would like each of your client's to be as a result of using your services or programs.
When I founded my own agency to deal with the growing homeless crisis, I began the agency with one sole purpose - to get as many of our clients contributing to society. If anyone has read Victor Frankl's, "Man's Search for Meaning", you will know that Frankl believed that people who have a purpose or a meaning to their lives will then overcome and deal with many barriers that life has to offer. He created his own therapy called, logotherapy. This therapy was developed based upon his observations as a prisoner in one of the concentration camps during World War II. Victor Frankl's theories have framed how I believe people are motivated. When I developed the term "contributing member of society", it was to reflect his theory that when people are contributing in some way, they feel greater purpose or meaning in their lives.
If everone were to have some kind of purpose or meaning in life, then I think we would find or create a very different type of society. As I worked more and more with the homeless and later with the mentally and phsically challenged, the elderly, and the First Nations, I found that society tended to think pouring money into the various groups that were not currently contributing to society was the best solution. Give them money and let them survive, but I think this deprives individuals of the ability to discover their own purpose or meaning and consequently move from just surviving to thriving. If we could provide or create more opportunities for more people to "contribute to society", we would be giving populations a chance to feel a purpose or develop some meaning within society.
Therefore, if you are still struggling with outcomes, then think about finding ways to have more of your clients become contributing members of society. That may be your most powerful outcome.
Something to think about...
bottom line for non-profits
Have you ever been in a fundraising meeting and the funder has asked you what your bottom line is? Most funders expect you to answer in financial terms because to the corporate sector, bottom line means net profit or net surplus (some use the expression to force you to get to the point, but we will save that for another discussion).
I would like to challenge you to think about what the bottom line equivalent really should be in the non-profit sector. Businesses are typically in business to make money; otherwise, why would you be in business? We won't get into tax havens or write-offs here!
So, the bottom line for the corporate or for-profit sector is whether or not you did. Excuse the pun, but that makes sense. If your goal is to make money, then your bottom-line should be showing whether you have or not.
In the not-for-profit sector, what is the goal? Since most agencies deal with people, I think the end goal for most agencies is to have as many clients succeed or meet the purpose of your agency. So, I think the bottom line for non-profit agencies should be based upon how many clients have succeeded. This is also be known as the organizational outcome.
Since most non-profit agencies are established based upon meeting some kind of societal need, would not the bottom line be whether or not you have come closer to solving that need? If your mission states that you will find jobs for homeless youth, then shouldn't your bottom line be whether or not you have?
I am not saying that financial stability is not important. It certainly is, but I believe it is a means to the end, not the end. If you agree with my thinking, then think about how much time you devote to client success versus how much time you spend towards raising or cutting funds.
Many agencies that I have worked with over the past eight years have not really figured out their end goal in terms of client success. They are unsure of how to define it. They can tell me how many clients are currently using or have used their services, but they can't tell me what kind of success they expect from clients as a result of using their services or programs.
Consequently, it becomes easier to define the bottom line as financial stability.
Something to think about!!
Labels: bottom line, client success, non-profit, outcomes
