The impact of the AO foundation on fracture care : an evaluation of 60 years AO foundation

Objectives Sixty years ago, the Association of Osteosynthesis (AO) was founded with the aim to improve fracture treatment and has since grown into one of the largest medical associations worldwide. Aim of this study was to evaluate AO's impact on science, education, patient care and the MedTech business. Design/methods Impact evaluations were conducted as appropriate for the individual domains: Impact on science was measured by analyzing citation frequencies of publications promoted by AO. Impact on education was evaluated by analyzing the evolution of number and location of AO courses. Impact on patient care was evaluated with a health economic model analyzing cost changes and years of life gained through the introduction of osteosynthesis in 17 high-income countries (HICs). Impact on MedTech business was evaluated by analyzing sales data of AO-associated products. Results Thirty-five AO papers and 2 major AO textbooks are cited at remarkable frequencies in high ranking journals with up to 2000 citations/year. The number of AO courses steadily increased with a total of 645'000 participants, 20‘000 teaching days and 2‘500 volunteer faculty members so far. The introduction of osteosynthesis saved at least 925 billion Swiss Francs [CHF] in the 17 HICs analyzed and had an impact on avoiding premature deaths comparable to the use of antihypertensive drugs. AO-associated products generated sales of 55 billion CHF. Conclusion AO's impact on science, education, patient care, and the MedTech business was significant because AO addressed hitherto unmet needs by combining activities that mutually enriched and reinforced each other

What's the Difference? How Foundation Trustees View Evaluation

Trustee Evaluation ToolkitTrustees care deeply about impact. Understanding results is part of their fiduciary duty. As foundations strive to improve performance, advance accountability and share knowledge, their desire for evaluation -- reliable data on organizational effectiveness -- grows. Based on discussions with trustees, we've heard that current evaluation approaches don't always generate useful information. In too many cases, foundation evaluation practices don't align with trustee needs. Trustees across the United States believe there are ways to improve how we determine the effectiveness of social investments. FSG Social Impact Advisors, with funding from the James Irvine Foundation, interviewed dozens of foundation trustees, CEOs and evaluation experts to uncover critical issues and exciting ideas related to evaluation. This "toolkit" shares highlights from these interviews, and explores innovative new approaches

On the Foundation of Guidelines for Health Economic Evaluation

In recent years, there has been increased interest in setting up guidelines for carrying out cost-effectiveness analysis of medical interventions, and some such guidelines have indeed been established. In the paper, we present a model of information retrievement and use in which we can study the role of guidelines. The main result, which is a version of the well-known theorem of Blackwell (1948), shows that in cases where there are sufficiently many decisions to be made on the basis of the information obtained, there can be no objective ranking of methods, except the trivial one stating that more information is better than less. The consequence is that guidelines, and the very detailed version known as the reference case approach, may have administrative advantages but can be harmful when considered as an aid towards better decisions.cost-effectiveness; guidelines; Blackwell’s theorem

Early Learning Innovation Fund Evaluation Final Report

This is a formative evaluation of the Hewlett Foundation's Early Learning Innovation Fund that began in 2011 as part of the Quality Education in Developing Countries (QEDC) initiative.  The Fund has four overarching objectives, which are to: promote promising approaches to improve children's learning; strengthen the capacity of organizations implementing those approaches; strengthen those organizations' networks and ownership; and grow 20 percent of implementing organizations into significant players in the education sector. The Fund's original design was to create a "pipeline" of innovative approaches to improve learning outcomes, with the assumption that donors and partners would adopt the most successful ones. A defining feature of the Fund was that it delivered assistance through two intermediary support organizations (ISOs), rather than providing funds directly to implementing organizations. Through an open solicitation process, the Hewlett Foundation selected Firelight Foundation and TrustAfrica to manage the Fund. Firelight Foundation, based in California, was founded in 1999 with a mission to channel resources to community-based organizations (CBOs) working to improve the lives of vulnerable children and families in Africa. It supports 12 implementing organizations in Tanzania for the Fund. TrustAfrica, based in Dakar, Senegal, is a convener that seeks to strengthen African-led initiatives addressing some of the continent's most difficult challenges. The Fund was its first experience working specifically with early learning and childhood development organizations. Under the Fund, it supported 16 such organizations: one in Mali and five each in Senegal, Uganda and Kenya. At the end of 2014, the Hewlett Foundation commissioned Management Systems International (MSI) to conduct a mid-term evaluation assessing the implementation of the Fund exploring the extent to which it achieved intended outcomes and any factors that had limited or enabled its achievements. It analyzed the support that the ISOs provided to their implementing organizations, with specific focus on monitoring and evaluation (M&E). The evaluation included an audit of the implementing organizations' M&E systems and a review of the feasibility of compiling data collected to support an impact evaluation. Finally, the Foundation and the ISOs hoped that this evaluation would reveal the most promising innovations and inform planning for Phase II of the Fund. The evaluation findings sought to inform the Hewlett Foundation and other donors interested in supporting intermediary grant-makers, early learning innovations and the expansion of innovations. TrustAfrica and Firelight Foundation provided input to the evaluation's scope of work. Mid-term evaluation reports for each ISO provided findings about their management of the Fund's Phase I and recommendations for Phase II. This final evaluation report will inform donors, ISOs and other implementing organizations about the best approaches to support promising early learning innovations and their expansion. The full report outlines findings common across both ISOs' experience and includes recommendations in four key areas: adequate time; appropriate capacity building; advocacy and scaling up; and evaluating and documenting innovations. Overall, both Firelight Foundation and TrustAfrica supported a number of effective innovations working through committed and largely competent implementing organizations. The program's open-ended nature avoided being prescriptive in its approach, but based on the lessons learned in this evaluation and the broader literature, the Hewlett Foundation and other donors could have offered more guidance to ISOs to avoid the need to continually relearn some lessons. For example, over the evaluation period, it became increasingly evident that the current context demands more focused advance planning to measure impact on beneficiaries and other stakeholders and a more concrete approach to promoting and resourcing potential scale-up. The main findings from the evaluation and recommendations are summarized here

Are We There Yet? A Communications Evaluation Guide

Most foundation and nonprofit communicators can speak at length about the work they do and what it's intended to achieve. But when it comes to describing exactly what their efforts are achieving, few can offer specifics.This guide helps foundation and nonprofit communicators learn whether their communications are effective and what is being achieved -- and determine if any course corrections are necessary.Among the reasons stressed for evaluating communication efforts are these:Evaluation improves the effectiveness of communications.Evaluation can help organizations more effectively engage with intended audiences.Situations change - strategies and tactics may need to change as well.Evaluation ensures wise allocation of resources.The guide points out that evaluation need not be limited to large-scale campaigns or major outreach activities, but should also conducted for efforts to raise awareness of an organization or an issue. And once an evaluation is underway, the guide suggests findings be shared with those who may benefit from what is learned, such as team members, the board, colleagues and peers.The guide includes:Background on why evaluation can contribute to good communications.Four case studies of evaluation in action from the Lumina Foundation for Education, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the Neimand Collaborative, and the California HealthCare Foundation.A worksheet for creating an evaluation plan

Speaking for Themselves: Advocates' Perspectives on Evaluation

"Speaking for Themselves: Advocates' Perspectives on Evaluation" will give you a better understanding of advocates' views on evaluation, the advocacy strategies and capacities they find effective, and current evaluation practices. Based on Innovation's Network's research, the report includes recommendations for advocates, funders, and evaluators. Both the research and publication were made possible by the Annie E. Casey Foundation and The Atlantic Philanthropies

Final Report from the Models for Change Evaluation

Note: This evaluation is accompanied by an evaluation of the National Campaign for this initiative as well as introduction to the evaluation effort by MacArthur's President, Julia Stasch, and a response to the evaluation from the program team. Access these related materials here (https://www.macfound.org/press/grantee-publications/evaluation-models-change-initiative).Models for Change is an initiative of The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundationto accelerate juvenile justice reforms and promote fairer, more effective, and more developmentally appropriate juvenile justice systems throughout the United States. Between 2004 and 2014, the Foundation invested more than $121 million in the initiative, intending to create sustainable and replicable models of systems reform.In June 2013, the Foundation partnered with Mathematica Policy Research and the University of Maryland to design and conduct a retrospective evaluation of Models for Change. The evaluation focused on the core state strategy, the action network strategy, and the national context in which Models for Change played out. This report is a digest and synthesis of several technical reports prepared as part of the evaluation

Evaluation of the Conrad N. Hilton Foundation Chronic Homelessness Initiative: 2015

Under a September 2011 contract with the Conrad N. Hilton Foundation, Abt Associates has been conducting an evaluation of the Hilton Foundation's Chronic Homelessness Initiative, with the goal of answering the overarching question: Is the Chronic Homelessness Initiative an effective strategy to end and prevent chronic homelessness in Los Angeles County? The evaluation is designed to provide both progress on interim milestones related to improving the systems for serving people experiencing chronic homelessness and estimates of the effect of permanent supportive housing (PSH) on residents and on the problem of chronic homelessness. Since the beginning of the Chronic Homelessness Initiative, the Foundation has awarded more than $56.7 million in multiyear grants to 29 nonprofit groups working in LA and beyond. Grantmaking has concentrated on three broad areas: homelessness systems change, targeted program delivery, and knowledge dissemination. The Foundation has shown leadership across the three funding areas by its willingness to take reasonable risks to innovate, by spurring other community stakeholders to action, and by expanding the reach of the Initiative beyond direct investments. The Foundation articulated six strategic goals for the Initiative. The goals represent significant milestones toward the ultimate goal of ending and preventing chronic homelessness in Los Angeles. In this fourth annual evaluation report, we provide updates on progress towards each goal. These status updates are summarized below and elaborated in the body of this report. Many of the five-year goals have been exceeded, and systems change efforts have created momentum for continued success

Strategic Legal Fund for Vulnerable Young Migrants: Evaluation of Achievements

This is a summary of an independent evaluation of The Strategic Legal Fund for Vulnerable Young Migrants by On the Tin Ltd. The SLF is a project of Trust for London, delivered in partnership with Esmée Fairbairn Foundation, Paul Hamlyn Foundation, Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust, Unbound Philanthropy and MigrationWork CIC

Assessing Social Impacts of Investments: Developing Effective Evaluation Systems to Measure Social Returns

Strategic and clear structures provide a solid foundation for effective and sustainable impact assessment. While the details of the evaluation systems and processes will vary by program and desired impact, there are guidelines and considerations based on best practices that have broad applications for any kind of evaluation