Nonprofit Performance: Accounting for the Agency of Clients

Performance is a key concern for nonprofits providing human services. Yet our understanding of what drives performance remains incomplete. Existing outcome measurement systems track the programmatic activities staff complete and the extent to which participants respond in programmatically intended ways. However, clients do not just receive services and respond as intended and staff do not simply complete program activities. Drawing on a data set of 47 interviews with frontline staff in eight human service nonprofits, we show how frontline staff work in a partnership with clients to set an agenda for change and achieve desired results. We call this co-determination work and argue that it represents a critical and often neglected dimension of nonprofit performance

From program to network: the evaluator’s role in today’s public problem-solving environment

Today's public policy discussions increasingly focus on how networks of public and private actors collaborate across organizational, sectoral, and geographical boundaries to solve increasingly complex problems. Yet, many of evaluation's key concepts, including the evaluator's role, assume an evaluand that is programmatically or organizationally defined and bounded. This article explores the implications of this changing public policy environment for the evaluator's role by examining one case: an evaluand that was a loose collaboration of four individuals in dispersed organizations working to reframe public policy and to change professional practice in early care and education. We describe this evaluand and the dimensions of it that challenged our evaluative role. We conclude by suggesting an alternative conception of the evaluator's role that can serve evaluators in this changing policy environment

A supramolecular helix that disregards chirality

The functions of complex crystalline systems derived from supramolecular biological and non-biological assemblies typically emerge from homochiral programmed primary structures via first principles involving secondary, tertiary and quaternary structures. In contrast, heterochiral and racemic compounds yield disordered crystals, amorphous solids or liquids. Here, we report the self-assembly of perylene bisimide derivatives in a supramolecular helix that in turn self-organizes in columnar hexagonal crystalline domains regardless of the enantiomeric purity of the perylene bisimide. We show that both homochiral and racemic perylene bisimide compounds, including a mixture of 21 diastereomers that cannot be deracemized at the molecular level, self-organize to form single-handed helical assemblies with identical single-crystal-like order. We propose that this high crystalline order is generated via a cogwheel mechanism that disregards the chirality of the self-assembling building blocks. We anticipate that this mechanism will facilitate access to previously inaccessible complex crystalline systems from racemic and homochiral building blocks

Bottom-Up Organizing with Tools from On High: Understanding the Data Practices of Labor Organizers

This paper provides insight into the use of data tools in the American labor movement by analyzing the practices of staff employed by unions to organize alongside union members. We interviewed 23 field-level staff organizers about how they use data tools to evaluate membership. We find that organizers work around and outside of these tools to develop access to data for union members and calibrate data representations to meet local needs. Organizers mediate between local and central versions of the data, and draw on their contextual knowledge to challenge campaign strategy. We argue that networked data tools can compound field organizers' lack of discretion, making it more difficult for unions to assess and act on the will of union membership. We show how the use of networked data tools can lead to less accurate data, and discuss how bottom-up approaches to data gathering can support more accurate membership assessments

Mediating Accountability: How Nonprofit Funding Intermediaries Use Performance Measurement and Why It Matters for Governance

Performance measurement has become an important tool for ensuring accountability in a governance environment, where addressing public problems often takes place outside the direct purview of government. Although a good deal of attention has been given to government’s use of performance measurement in these settings, either in contracting relationships or interorganizational networks, this paper argues that ensuring accountability in a governance environment requires greater attention to how nonstate actors, or the other principals, use performance measurement. This paper focuses on nonprofit funding intermediaries and their use of performance measurement. Nonprofit funding intermediaries gather funds from a range of public and private donors and regrant these monies to a defined set of local nonprofits. As such, they occupy somewhat unique positions in a web of actors all seeking to solve public problems. We offer a conceptual overview of intermediaries and then critically examine how three nonprofit funding intermediaries used performance measurement

How Helping Can Reinforce or Attenuate Status Inequalities: The Case of Nonprofit Organizations

This article examines one type of social exchange that signals status: giving and receiving help. I focus on formal helping exchanges between staff and participants in nonprofit organizations. Bringing together status theory with research from social psychology on receiving help and studies of nonprofits, I identify how the helping exchanges in these settings can reinforce or attenuate status hierarchies with important consequences for participants. I examine three attenuation practices (sharing control, establishing commonalities, and questioning causes) and three practices that can reinforce status hierarchies (asserting control, reinforcing differences, and assuming causes) to show how status processes play a powerful but unexamined role in the very places dedicated to addressing inequality

The Potential of Outcome Measurement for Strengthening Nonprofits’ Accountability to Beneficiaries

This article considers one mechanism that could create a clearer accountability path between nonprofits and their beneficiaries: Outcome measurement. Outcome measurement focuses attention on a nonprofit’s beneficiaries and whether they are better off as a result of the nonprofit’s work. The article analyzed 10 outcome measurement guides targeted to nonprofits, totaling more than 1,000 pages of text. The analysis shows that the guides were neither uniform in the conceptualization of nonprofit beneficiaries nor in how they directed nonprofits to use outcome measurement with their beneficiaries. Despite scholars’ suggestion that a nonprofit’s relationship to their beneficiaries is a key accountability relationship, the guides suggest that beneficiaries have an ambiguous standing, relative to other stakeholders, in the nonprofit accountability environment

Nonprofit Organizations and Outcome Measurement: From Tracking Program Activities to Focusing on Frontline Work

Why do we continue to see evidence that nonprofit staff feel like outcome measurement is missing important aspects of their work? Based on an analysis of over 1,000 pages of material in 10 outcome measurement guides and a focused literature review of frontline work in three types of nonprofit organizations, this article shows that existing outcome measurement frameworks focus on how staff implement programs rather than how staff work with clients. Outcome measurement guides direct nonprofits to track program activities completed and the outcomes resulting from those program activities. In contrast, the accounts of frontline work in nonprofits show that nonprofit staff start by building a relationship with the person they are serving and then adjusting programs and services to better meet the needs and goals of this individual. Consequently, outcome measurement may go some distance in helping us understand nonprofit performance but may also mischaracterize nonprofit performance

Account Space: How Accountability Requirements Shape Nonprofit Practice

Improving nonprofit accountability is one of the most important issues facing the sector. Improving nonprofit accountability in ways that are attentive to what we might consider unique and valuable about how nonprofits address public problems is the challenge at hand. This article presents a framework for examining the consequences of accountability systems for nonprofit practice. Drawing on empirical findings from three case studies and early sociological work on accounts, the framework considers four questions (i.e., When do organizations give accounts? What is the purpose of the account? When are those accounts accepted or rejected by important stakeholders? And with what consequence?) but makes a distinction between a verification and explanatory accountability process. By making this distinction and clarifying the relationship between these two accountability processes, the proposed framework can be used to identify conflicts between accountability systems and nonprofit practice and to understand how efforts to ensure accountability can spur a change in nonprofit practice, change stakeholder expectations for nonprofits or leave both intact