Building on its research into the field’s ability to capture and share searchable nonprofit accountability information both locally and across the country, the Accountability Subcommittee has issued a report entitled, "Impact and Accountability—A Framework for Community Foundations."

This report articulates standards, policies and best practices the Subcommittee has established to guide field-wide accountability efforts. It also includes the data and business requirements that any  technology provider should address if they choose to serve the field in the area of

This is an essential guide for any community foundation looking to commence or expand their local accountability efforts and it is the basis upon which nationwide nonprofit data sharing will become possible.

accountability.

While there will undoubtedly be debate around the finer points of what is proposed, this paper establishes a leadership position we believe will significantly advance our individual and collective efforts in this area.  Download the paper below:

Accountability tools help community foundations collect and generate reliable, consistent data about charitable grants. Data on nonprofit performance and other searchable nonprofit data can be used in a number of ways:

• To determine if grants made a difference in the lives of people
• To assess, refine and improve the foundation’s grant-making strategy
• To help develop (and test) theories of change for future investments.
• Present information in a way that program officers, board members, and donors can readily analyze with their own evaluative lenses and against their own philanthropic objectives.
• To fuel communications with donors and the general community about foundation impact

Most community foundations have a wealth of information about what is going on in their community. The information fills staff’s heads, is stuffed in file drawers and, maybe, even recorded in databases (with limited ability to retrieve it in useful ways). Foundations can usually tell those who ask how many grants you have awarded to how many agencies, and what the total grant making for the foundation amounts to. In other words, foundations have a lot of documentation about their giving program and some of the inputs, activities and outputs that result from it. However, most community foundations are frustrated with their ability to truly demonstrate effectiveness.

In addition, field-wide R&D has identified the need to aggregate nonprofit data across markets, as we continue to build our ‘field’ and as our donors act more and more globally. We’ve seen early indications of this need as national (and natural) disasters raise interest in working collaboratively. The ability of community foundations to act as a trusted conduit for contributions after the 1997 flood in the Midwest, the bombing of the Oklahoma Federal Building and the tragedy on 9/11 provides good examples of this functioning. This need also arises as donors buy second (and third) homes and begin to play civic roles in each of the cities in which they or their children reside. Community foundations have managed this need in a ‘pick up the phone’ mode in the past. However, as it increases (and becomes a marketing niche for the field) we will need technology capacity to take this to scale, including the ability of different searchable nonprofit databases and products to connect with each other to share information, to relate to core systems and to provide Web site interface for password-protected donor access to the database and search functions.

A limited set of nonprofit data resides within community foundations’ core systems, and is currently not accessible as searchable data for most of the field. A few newer, Internet-based systems have been created, most notably ImpactMgr (developed by B2PCommerce Corp and CFA) and Dot.che (developed by Arizona Community Foundation, Ephibian and the Dot.che CCB) that begin to address the needs described above. Use of both tools is limited but both are built on flexible, modern platforms and are headed in the right direction, including some or all of the following elements:

• Build a database of nonprofit profiles, including management, financial and grant performance information
• Assemble data on performance outcomes and measures
• Make this information searchable by donors at the community foundations’ discretion

The Technology Steering Committee anticipates using Syndicate funds for outreach and education related to this issue, as well as to lay the groundwork for future needs, particularly addressing our ability as a field to share searchable nonprofit data and accountability information across markets (i.e. nationally).

(i)      Accountability Is Driven by its Appeal to Donors/Funding Partners
The appeal to donors is the driving rationale for the accountability work currently being done.  This means that information needs to be presented in an accessible way to donor relations staff, program officers, board members, and donors.  Accessible so they can readily understand it, that they can analyze it with their own evaluative lenses and against their own philanthropic objectives.  

(ii)    Accountability Is Feasible When Integrated with Business Process
Accountability is only feasible when it is integrated into normal processing.  The streamlining and automation of foundations’ philanthropic business practices enhance the production of usable data on accountability, generate significant time savings and efficiency gains in the awarding and management of grants, and provide enhanced opportunities for foundations to learn from and improve their own grant making.

(iii)    Accountability Is Credible When it Engages and Enables Grantees
To determine if grants made a difference in the lives of people, reliable and consistent data on grantees and grants is critical.  Measuring this difference lies at the heart of accountability and of the  foundations’ marketing message.  The credibility of this effort, and much of the responsibility for generating these data, rests with grantees.