My “light” evening reading is a hint.
My “light” evening reading is a hint.
Think strategic plans have to be complicated, time-intensive, and formal documents worthy of a Pulitzer?
Who has time for that?
Come learn how to put together a “good enough” strategic plan that you could even get done while preparing that grant application due next month! See you Thursday afternoon at #gpaconf19 for a double session – come ready to work!
#grantwriting #grant #strategicplan #goodenough #keepitsimple
Crisp air, changing leaves, colorful trees, sweatshirts, and football. And my birthday (and my husband’s and my son’s)!! All reasons to celebrate my favorite season. (No, I didn’t mention the “flavor” – not a fan, call me crazy!)
It’s also the time of year that I start to look at my plan for next year. December is just so full, fitting in a strategic plan review just doesn’t happen. And January – well – that’s for resolution failure, not a good time to try to plan while you are starving, you just don’t make good decisions when you are hangry! Plus, fall is it’s the start of my personal new year, so it’s fitting.
It’s often said those that “do” don’t take the time to “do” it for themselves – and that is so true! So I’m going to post my progress in updating my plans and give you a glimpse into my process. My wish is that other independent consultants can benefit from my work.
I can organize and streamline just about anything business related – except for my office space! That’s where I called in Laura from Victoria’s Organizers to help me sort through the layers of clutter and create a space that works for my work.
Four full contractor trash bags, 2 tubs and a box to my lovely assistant to scan, and 2 trips to Goodwill later…I have a space that is functional for me even if not textbook organized (and I can see the floor!).
I highly recommend calling in a pro to help, even if you think you’re pretty good (as in all other things – the pro is a pro for a reason). She was able to work within my style and needs (i.e. organized chaos). I still have some homework to get done before our next session, but I’m already working in a much more functional layout.
You may not need to rearrange furniture each year, but the declutter and toss clears the path for new work and thinking. Give it a try!
With functional space to work in, now it’s time to look ahead. The nice thing about being an independent consultant is that I get to determine (to some extent) what I work on and how I spend my time.
What is it I want to do?
What do I really enjoy working on that I’m also really good at?
(Change the “I” to we for your department/organization and this will work for any setting)
With dry-erase marker in hand, I’ve outlined a list of the kinds of tasks and projects I enjoy and have the skillset to complete. I’ve also identified a couple of opportunities to get some additional training so I can do some things even better. I’ll be looking for an Excel “beyond-expert” class if anyone knows of any!
Looking for commonalities I found a few themes in what I like doing: “growth, decisions, concept, and manage.” Building to growth and bringing concepts to clarity are part of helping a organization evolve while decision making and managing are crucial to sustaining an organization.
Whiteboard filled, I’ve taken a step back and narrowed it down to a pretty simple concept:
I thrive when I’m helping solve problems to evolve or sustain organizations.
A little rewriting and (a lot of) wordsmithing and I’ll have a mission statement!
Next, I’m going to work on identifying strategies to bring in not only new clients (which, of course, is important), but also new challenges and problems that need solved. Stay tuned for the steps I’m taking to create these strategies and results of this work and what I’ll be up to next week.
As I finish another grant review panel (this one Federal), I found that I had to check my “crankiness” meter – where I was on the scale when I reviewed the app – during our discussion in the team-consensus calls. Upon reflection, I decided that the applicants would do certain things that immediately changed my perception of the rest of the application. While I could temper this, somewhat, in the consensus scoring – there were many things that irritated me so much that I couldn’t (wouldn’t) let it go. And others on my review panel had their irritants too!
So, without further ado – if you really want to irritate your reviewer and have them view your application with the most critical of eye…make sure your…
In your budget, make sure that your summary table doesn’t add up – both for the request and any match requirement. If you want to outdo yourself in this area, your subtotals in the various sections should not match your summary. For added bonus frustration, leave out key pieces of information, such as base salary, so that the reviewer has absolutely no way of determining if your budget is accurate or reasonable.
For our objectives, make sure that your baseline and projected measures for your indicators is confusing – using percentages of percentages without mentioning what your denominator is. Reviewers will never be math or evaluation people that can figure it out; so you’ll be ok giving fluffernutter for objective measures.
For even more excitement, have numbers in various sections referred to in other sections with different values in each section – it will keep your reviewers on their toes.
When providing a partner list and qualifications, your Letters of Commitment that you attach should be from completely different entities – that way your reviewer has to figure out how it all fits together. Even better, have different partners in the qualifications list, letters, and budget. Reviewers all love an intricate puzzle to put together at the end of a long day! For bonus points, say that one of the partners is critical for implementation, but don’t include a letter from that partner – just your word that your most critical partner is on board is good enough.
Ditto the above for project staff. Be sure to include a random CV/Biosketch in the attachments too – reviewers love to be tested to see if they are paying attention!
When documenting your match, have a different amount in your budget than what is committed in your letters. Reviewers don’t even look at that or try to figure it out. Make sure to include various match amounts from organizations that aren’t in your budget or that you haven’t mentioned anywhere in your proposal, for good measure. Even better, just put in a dollar amount and don’t demonstrate how that number was obtained.
There’s nothing quite like reading a proposal that says that it is “unique” and “innovative” and – even better – “revolutionary to the industry” – when you’ve read the same project concept three other ways and those other proposals cited the research and project models that they are building their project from. Just put your “original” ideas out there – no need to do any best practice research during the project development phase.
If there are instructions or templates for the proposal or letters, no need to pay attention to those pesky details – reviewers aren’t going to look at the NOFO to know what was required – and there’s no way you would get a past recipient and someone who has written and managed similar applications/awards for several years on the same review panel – right?
When there’s a template, you would never want the reviewer to have an easy time finding information, so switching up the headings (or taking them out altogether), removing borders from tables (making it really hard to read), and abandoning the provided formatting for checkboxes and forms is highly encouraged.
Every activity is always going to continue throughout the project, from beginning to end, so by all means, just give your timeline as “ongoing” for every activity.
Timelines are just wishful thinking anyway, so no need to put any thought into the exercise. Reviewers don’t need to know what’s slated for the first year versus the third year, or even the fifth year; they are just being nosey. As for milestones, we will just know that we are making progress – we don’t need to think about them or when we might achieve anything that matters in our project. We aren’t going to meet the timeline we proposed anyway – we are waaaay to ambitious in what we proposed and definitely don’t have the staff FTE count to support the work (but, shhhhhh the reviewers will never figure that out!).
I review budgets and work plans first (this is after the kids are in bed). When your math doesn’t add up – I’m jaded for the rest of your proposal – if they can’t do the math in their budget, can they manage this project? If your work plan isn’t supported by the budget, I really question if your project is achievable. I’ve worked enough projects to know what it takes and the FTE support needed to execute a project; I’m all for lean teams – but there’s a difference between operating a skeleton team and not having enough time/bodies to achieve what you set out to do in a project. In your evaluation, give your benchmarks and indicators careful thought. You will have people that have implemented projects like yours on the review panel and they have a pretty good idea what is feasible and what is inflated. Finally, take the extra time before you submit to make sure that your supporting documentation (attachments) match what is in your proposal – the reviewers really do look that them.
Here’s to (not) irritating your reviewer!
Stacy Fitzsimmons is the Founder and CEO of SNF Writing Solutions, LLC
New software programs and apps can make life wonderful for organizations. In addition to just rolling out the new system with the software company, there are other items to keep in mind.
Even with the greatest software, the human element still exists. Users and Admins alike will experience tremendous change through the new system! System champions must be ready with FAQs, training, and detailed documentation on how to perform job-specific tasks within the new system. Expect some fear, resistance, and slower reception from staff.
Software systems are wonderful tools for automation and efficiency. Nay times the new system will eliminate tasks done manually. There are also times a new system will modify or add new outside-the-system tasks. To ease the transition, prepare to discuss and document the modifications to manual tasks. This can be achieved through a FAQ or in documentation manual side notes.
Related to outside-the-system tasks, the overall business processes will be modified with the implementation of the new system. It’s okay and to be expected that the new system disrupts the status quo. Manage the chaos and ease all affected staff with good current state (pre) and new state (post) workflows and stepwise manuals. For tasks that are overly simple or only come up every once in a while, use a one to two-page Quick Reference Guide (QRG) to document the task. Create this documentation while you have access to the developer or a software representative that can provide demonstrations and answer questions.
When you started your software finding mission, or when you began the implementation with the software company, you most likely created a list of business requirements. Be sure to review this list of requirements periodically as the implementation rolls out. “But we know the requirements; why do we have to review them?” For several reasons, foremost are:
Whether provided by software company, internal resources, or a third party, training on the new system is critical. New, shiny software will be absolutely useless without a trained staff to implement the new system. The training dshould include a walk-through of the basic system navigation, and then a series of sessions on how to complete job-specific tasks. Each session should reference documentation tools available to the staff as they work post-rollout.
The training and documentation should be captured and stored in a way that can be used in the future for onboarding new staff and as a reference for staff needing a refresher or transitioning to a new job function.
In the excitement of implementing a new software, the change-management elements can often be forgotten. Include these elements in the planning stage and work on them throughout the implementation.
I wish you well on your software implementation. Should you have questions or need more information or help on any of these topics, leave a comment below, or you can email or call me.
Stacy Fitzsimmons is the Founder and CEO of SNF Writing Solutions, LLC
Update: DLT is released! Due July 17th.
For those that survived the USDA RUS Distance Learning and Telemedicine 2016 grant application season, congratulations!
As we are gearing up for another round this Spring, I reflect on the process with several lessons learned.
Gone are the days where the binders are the required submission method. As of last season, Grants.gov became a submission option. I submitted by both methods in 2016 – binders and Grants.gov – both methods were successful and awarded. As Grants.gov doesn’t require the interaction of humans (i.e. FedEx or UPS), my suggestion is to go with Grants.gov this year (of course, I’m a proponent of Grants.gov anyway – I know, I’m weird!).
Some decisions can be made in a 5-point margin. Do everything you can to capture every point. Find a Native American tribe that can use some equipment and build it into your project. They get the equipment they need and you get the points for having the involvement.
Not scoring high in rurality for a telehealth project? Add some single point locations such as FQHC clinics and CMHCs. They often need resources they don’t have ready-access to receive. A telemedicine option can work great. If the clinic route doesn’t work – look to adding school nurse offices where there is a healthcare shortage.
The match requirement can be daunting. Keep track of it as you have the commitment and when you have it in writing. Vendors can’t provide match anymore – so you will have to find funding on your own. This change came down for 2016 and you better believe it will be there again. We are on our own to find the matching funds. In-kind isn’t always looked upon favorably either – so cash is king!
Updates may happen between the time you start the project and the time you submit. Since the NSLP and census data is easily verifiable, be sure that you check just before submission as to the most current data available and cite your source with a date retrieved. That way if they change again – and I’m sure they will – you have it documented as to when the numbers were pulled and there isn’t an air of mystery and suspicion about the stats if there is a substantial change.
If you request a lot of laptops or desktop units, don’t expect that the actual computer and its peripherals will be an allowable expense. While we all know you can’t have the DL or the T without computers, most were stricken from budgets last year as an unallowable expense – even after appeal! Have a plan B (or D, or M, or X) as to how you will be able to cover the expense for the computers.
I’m looking forward to a great 2017 DLT season this year! Can’t wait to see what changes this year (and administration) brings! Wishing you great success in your DLT adventures.
Stacy Fitzsimmons is the Founder and CEO of SNF Writing Solutions, LLC
Most of the time, grants are performance-based financial vehicles. You have to do something in order to get paid. In growing numbers, funders are also looking to how well you do that something. So why are organizations still viewing grant management as a finance function?
Don’t get me wrong, there is still a financial aspect to grants management. Someone, hopefully with expertise in accounting, must manage the coffers. There are many regulations and nuances to managing the dollars and cents of a grant award that cannot be ignored.
That said, there is more to grant management than just the money. Just ask any grant program manager how much time is spent on managing the budget versus everything else that has to be accomplished.
Think of your program accountant. What do they do? How do they interact with others? Would you have them be the face of your organization? Would you rely on them to deliver an eloquent message as to the status of a not-performing-as-you-expected program?
If you answered yes, I want the name of your accountant!
No offense meant to any accountant. The reason there are stereotypes is largely because there’s some truth to the description.
The biggest responsibility in grant management is establishing and maintaining a positive relationship with your funder. They not only hold the checkbook, but they are also an investor in your program/organization. They buy-in to your success. You have to demonstrate that you are competent to deliver as well as committed to the mission. This takes a good communicator with impeccable interpersonal skills and a high degree of savvy in message delivery. Yes, schmoozing!
In general, schmoozing is not in the finance department repertoire.
So yes, you have to show how you spent the money. But, is that what funders are really looking for? Not in my experience.
Funders are looking for outcomes that are mission focused and relevant to the advancement of a program and an organization as a whole. Measures in new learning, a shift in attitude or perception, skill advancement are sought. These metrics are evaluated based on data captured in the implementation of the program, not in the ledger of debits and credits.
Let a group of toddlers out into the backyard and tell them they have promise they will only take 10 minutes to play and they must come back in to tell you what they did. How many toddlers will come back in 10 minutes? How many will you have to round up, capture, entice, bribe, chase, hogtie to come back in? How many will be able to say what they did?
Yep! the life of a grant manager when it comes to workplan and timeline management and reporting.
The finance department is probably used to this phenomenon when tracking down invoices or getting approvals. Are they equipped to do this for all of the grant deliverables?
Not usually. There are multiple milestones, reports, and metrics to track and analyze. Any deviation from what was committed to in the proposal requires advance permission from the funder (see #1 above!). This takes a true project management mindset with the budget only being one element of the commitment that needs to be kept.
From the initial search to identify a potential funder through close-out of the grant, the entire grant cycle is about meeting the funder’s mission with a project or program that is furthering the organizational mission. This mission-centric cycle can only be achieved through strategic alignment and intentional delivery. While financial considerations are a part of this pursuit, they are just that – a part – of a bigger whole. Financal considerations alone cannot deliver on mission-focused activities.
Make a list of all of the components of your grant-funded program. All of the pieces.
In my experience, you will see that a grant program has at minimum:
Looking at that list, you can extrapolate that each element could be construed as the responsibility of a different organizational department:
Each element is critical to the success of the grant-funded program. Successful grant management requires one point of contact to orchestrate all of these elements. That’s not the role of an accountant!
Where the grant operation should live is a debatable subject. Some say there shouldn’t be centralized grant operations, that individual departments can handle it all. Others (my camp) say that grant operations need a central hub. Any one of the organizational departments would work. Some entities have grants sections in finance, some in legal, some in marketing, some in the President’s suite, others in a special projects office. The grant office needs be placed where it can thrive to meet the multi-faceted demands of grant management.
My opinion: It is easier to coordinate (wrangle? herd?) equals than superiors. Reporting directly to the highest leadership position will poise the grant function to serve the organization in strategically sourcing funds and managing all aspects required of grant management. This would then require the grant office leader to be an equivalent to the finance department leader, not subservient to the finance leader. With access and equal communication to the department heads, the grant office leadership is empowered to deliver the best service to the organization and funders.
That’s what we all want, right? The best outcomes for the organization and the funder!
Stacy Fitzsimmons is the Founder and CEO of SNF Writing Solutions, LLC
Yes, the F is for Fitzsimmons, and the Luck o’ the Irish is in my family’s blood.
What I often contemplate in the proposal writing world is the proportion of a win that is skill and the portion that is luck.
As a professional planner and writer, it is often hard to contemplate how others will interprete our words: will they be able to see the vision? Will they feel our passion? Will our voice be heard? There is most certainly a skill in portraying, in the written word, what it is that you most passionate about in a way that makes the reader want to stand up and be your cheerleader and take up your cause. But is that the only thing in play?
The reader is the other side of the equation. What kind of day are they having? What are their demographics? Do they have any good or bad experiences related to what you would like to pursue? Do they already have their mind made up on our issue? Is their opinion for or against our position?
Taking into consideration all of these questions, I am lead to believe that a successful proposal is a blend of both innate skill and just a hint of luck.
The ability to follow directions lies in our hands.
We are all quite capable of following the rules, matching response to the request, and being clear and concise without a lot of jargon.
The RFP provides a guide and outline for what the response should contain…follow that outline! Use headers to demonstrate you are following the outline and are answering each question. Leave a trail for the reviewer to follow to check off all of the requirements. Use the same order in your response as they provided in the RFP. Then spend a moment in their shoes, would you be able to quickly run through the RFP requirements and identify each section and question? If you think the answer is yes, have someone else read through the requirements and your response. Another set of eyes can help to be sure that what you intended is coming through.
Here is the big secret: Don’t make the reviewer think too much!
There are ways to determine what you will face on the review side. Attend pre-conference workshops, calls, webinars. Determine what the hot buttons are for the proposal. There is a lot of context that can be gained from the RFP background and purpose section. Glean what you can. Channel your intuitive side (if you don’t have one, borrow someone who does!). What is said between the lines that you can use to write to the unsaid? Having this insight can make the difference between staying out of trouble and stepping into a big pile of…political or other agenda.
Do your homework to know if there is an incumbent and the status of that relationship. If it is a new project, determine what the catalyst was for the project. Being able to speak to the original need can be a tremendous asset.
Another track is to review previously successful proposals for trends in what works and common themes. With the Freedom of Information Act, you can request government-related proposal responses. Private RFPs become a bit more complicated. Knowing what worked before can set you on the right path.
Write with clarity and without jargon. If you think a million dollar word will impress, think again. Make it easy to read and the reviewer will focus more on the concept and approach rather than being distracted by the words. Don’t get so wrapped up in trying to impress that you alienate the reader. Do you really need to use “contusion” when ” bruise” will do?
With a well-organized and well-written proposal for a well-thought out program, well, you’ve done your part.
Now luck kicks in.
No matter how good the proposal, the final decision is out of our control. It’s the hardest part of proposal writing. After several weeks of ultimate control in the process and writing, we are suddenly at the mercy of others. Not a comfortable place for many of us.
You want a compassionate reviewer that is sensitive to your cause or method. One that is in a good mood with an open mind. Someone that will understand what you are trying to achieve. Someone who can set aside their personal agenda and review with an unbiased lens.
Did I mention that most reviewers are typically volunteers completing their assessments of our work in their spare time? How many hours of spare time would you be willing to give to review a dozen or more proposals like yours?
Make it worth their time and investment in your proposal that is taking away from their work, family, or kids!
…and with any luck you will get that call for a BAFO, interview, or award notification.
Wishing you a lot of luck in your proposal endeavors and reviewer assignment.
Stacy Fitzsimmons is the owner of SNF Writing Solutions. She is also both born and married into Irish blood. Happy St. Patrick’s day!
I was recently asked what the number one challenge is for local governments. As a former employee of a city in Indiana, I know without a doubt that the answer is property tax caps.
These caps were first introduced in 2009 and were meant to help taxpayers. While the caps have certainly accomplished that goal, they have had a dramatic effect on local governments, especially those that are not experiencing growth. This has led to lost revenue for many communities.
According to a December, 2015 Indianapolis Business Journal report, DeBoer and retired Community Research Institute director John Stafford stated that property tax caps have hit older, industrial cities hard, while the growing Indianapolis suburbs and thriving college towns are faring quite well.
I’ve witnessed the work of top officials at many cities, towns, and counties as they cut costs and slash budgets. I understand that everyone wants governments to work as efficiently and lean as possible. I believe most are accomplishing that goal.
However, the tax caps have still caused some unexpected damage. For example, neighboring school districts are seeing drastically different property tax revenues per student due to coverage areas. And I think we’re just beginning to see tax cap consequences like these.
So what can local governments do in order to keep providing vital services to their communities? Some, like the Central Indiana municipality I recently worked for, are looking at alternative funding such as trash fees. While every other city and town in the county has charged a trash fee, this city is still facing quite a battle to implement one.
Communities are also taking a closer look at local option income taxes for new revenue. As budgets continue to get squeezed, local government staff members will work to apply for more federal, state, corporate, and foundation grants.
New crowd funding campaigns, like those led by Citizinvestor http://www.citizinvestor.com/, are popping up for community projects such as dog parks, public art, and trails. These have been successful for some local governments as long as they invest the time and effort to promote the campaigns.
Like many organizations and businesses, local governments are being asked to do more with less. Alternative funding sources and grass roots community support will hopefully help us all continue to benefit from public safety services, parks, strong infrastructure, and more.
Amy Shankland is a former Associate with SNF Writing Solutions, LLC and guest blogger.
It might as well be a diagnosis of the plague!
Most of us associate evaluation with our annual employee performance review. No one likes the way performance evaluation is generally done. Not the manager. Not the employee. It’s probably the most dreaded, feared, heart-wrenching, ulcer-causing activity done in the business world.
So why would we want to put our entire program under that kind of microscope? Could anything be more repulsive?
I’ve really only encountered two types of people when it comes to evaluation: those that avoid it like the plague, and those that are so passionate about it that they will shout about its virtues from the rooftops.
Can you guess which I am?
Okay, so I am one that would shout it from the rooftops. Why, might you ask?
The simplest explanation is, I like to know where I stand, and what people are thinking. I like to know what I am doing really well, and what I need to work on in order to be the best “me” I can be. These concepts transcend my work and personal life.
For those like me, we can get geeked out pretty quickly when we start talking data, outcomes, process, budgets, the benefits of measurements, and what can be measured versus what should be measured. I am certain my pupils just dilated and my heart skipped a beat or two writing that sentence, and I didn’t even go into the difference between an output and an outcome!
For those whom evaluation is the plague, you may have just experienced sweaty palms, a blood pressure spike, hives breaking out across every limb, and may even feel the start of a migraine coming on just from reading that sentence!
So for those of you who think evaluation is like the plaque, know this – it really doesn’t have to be that bad. Breathe deeply and repeat that sentence again if you need to. It doesn’t have to, and frankly shouldn’t be that bad.
I know, I come from a very special place when I say that, but…really…as business professionals (yes, nonprofits, universities, and governments are businesses too!), and I’d stretch to even say as humans, we need to know if what we are doing is working. Otherwise, why are we even doing it (other than job security)? Don’t you want to know if your program is as good as you think it is?
In an environment of “proving your worth” evaluation can be the best prescription: it can show that what you do is worthwhile and you can also show that you identified what was wrong and made efforts to correct course. That’s pretty admirable.
So, next time you hear the word “evaluation” take a deep breath and start the process: 1) plan the evaluation, 2) conduct the evaluation, 3) determine the results of the evaluation, and 4) create and implement a game plan for addressing the results. Yes, this is an over-simplified view of the process, but it’s the framework that can get you to a better place mentally to face the project.
Also remember, that you don’t go though evaluation alone. It’s an all-hands-on-deck type of project. Even better, the best evaluations are those done by neutral third parties (hence you don’t do the bulk of the work!).
So again, take that deep breath. Now, here’s a brief overview of what you can expect when conducting an evaluation project.
In general, an evaluation project will include the following components.
Research pertinent to your industry and particular program/activity is used to inform the final evaluation design and the outcomes evaluation indicators.
The design will be finalized as part of the proposed evaluation project. All outcomes, indicators, and the methodology most appropriate for your organization and target program are reviewed or created. During the evaluation design, interview instruments, process evaluation objectives, outcome indicators with operational definitions, and project charter will be created using appropriate industry frameworks for evaluation (e.g. CDC Framework for Program Evaluation in Public Health and Program Evaluation Standards). The SNF Writing Solutions methodology also includes the Lean Six-Sigma DMAIC model.
Interviews with key stakeholders (leadership, employees, management, board members, possible clients, and funders) are conducted to assess program impetus, implementation, and interaction experience. The stakeholder pool and interview schedule is coordinated with the evaluation champion in your organization. These interviews will inform the remainder of the evaluation schedule and serve as a progress gate for any evaluation design modifications before moving forward.
Information. Excel Sheets. Databases. Calendars. Websites. Marketing literature. Budgets. Tally sheets. Meeting notes. The list goes on.
Depending on the focus of your evaluation, different types of data are gathered to feed the evaluation process. Some will be readily available and some will need to be culled from various sources. With the evaluation design completed, the data needed to compete the evaluation has already been determined and must be pulled together. The SNF Writing Solutions team includes data-gathering and data-entry experts that aid organizations through this process of gathering data and even creating new data sets.
The process evaluation assesses the extent to which the target program/department/ service is delivered as planned as well as the facilitators and barriers to implementation. The process evaluation will clarify how, why, and for whom the program works and which components are most/least effective. Through the process evaluation, an understanding of the opportunities for quality improvement and/or corrective feedback is established as well as determining the feasibility for replication and/or expansion of the program operations (remember, funders love programs that are replicable). Consideration of the reach of the program, the intervention dose delivered and the dose received, as well as the implementation and model fidelity within the context of the program environment will be included in the evaluation design.
The process evaluation with SNF Writing Solutions will generally include a Lean Six Sigma review of the program with a process documentation review, analysis of client and organizational service expectations, observation of all organization practices (with regard to HIPAA or other legal requirements as appropriate), documentation of current state, and statistical analysis of current state against service expectations.
A cost evaluation looks at the impact of program to the cost of the program/service for the target population or stakeholder (can be organization as a whole). Methodologies for the cost evaluation can vary. The SNF Writing Solutions evaluation includes a review of dollars spent versus income (or funds available in the case of a grant-funded program) and population served and a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) of providing services. As part of the cost evaluation, the return on investment (ROI) is generally calculated for the program. In reviewing the financials and CBA for the program, the feasibility for replication and/or expansion of the program in achieving outcomes can be considered. A high cost program can still be a sound investment for a funder if the results are impressive and long-lasting.
When thinking of evaluating a program, this is the evaluation that most think of: assessing the impact of a program on the societal improvements sought based on existing or determined short-term and long-term activities/services targeted in the evaluation. The literature review and stakeholder interviews will be used for qualitative analysis of the program. SNF Writing Solutions includes text theme determination. Quantitative data analysis of service provision versus expected outcomes will include a review of all outputs and outcome indicators from the program using a correlational analysis. The outcomes evaluation can include the feasibility for replication and/or expansion of the program in meeting societal needs. If needed, a baseline for indicators can be retroactively established from organizational data prior to the implementation of the project/program.
The final deliverable of a project is largely determined by the client-side champion of the evaluation project. A report will generally include the interpretation of all evaluations with conclusions regarding the program. The report will include statements regarding the merit, worth, and significance of the program/service and interpretations of the findings against the standards identified in the literature review, evaluation design, and stakeholder interviews. Recommendations for specific actions to take into consideration for improvement, replication and/or expansion of the program will also be included in the report.
At the conclusion of the evaluation, SNF Writing Solutions shares the methodology and results with organizational stakeholders, and, at the request of the organization, will assist in presenting to funders, staff, or other groups, and can prepare the findings for dissemination as a potential white paper, journal article, or for conference presentations as opportunities are available.
The evaluation process is only as good as the follow-through on the findings. Many things will prove to be working and should be left alone – don’t fix what isn’t broken. That leaves those items that weren’t quite what you were expecting, or had not gone planned. Take a good look at those items and figure out the root cause (this is why SNF Writing Solutions uses the Lean Six Sigma approach – you will already know root causes) and develop potential fixes for the root cause. Create an action plan to implement the change (if a big change, you may want assistance with change management) and monitor the effects of the changes you implement. This ongoing measurement and evaluation can be an extension of your relationship with the evaluator. As you see improvements, acknowledge and celebrate them!
Evaluation is not a one-and-done experience. Those organizations that are successful are always measuring (the right things) and evolving to meet the demands of their customers within the scope of the organizational expertise and mission. This is accomplished with rigorous and continuous evaluation of the organization and individual programs. SNF Writing Solutions generally includes post-evaluation follow-up and implementation support as part of any evaluation project.
Hopefully, with better overall evaluation experiences, those employee performance evaluations are also a little less stressful for you – everyone will know, on a regular basis, where everyone stands!
Here’s to the evaluation plague – turn it into your passion!