Search

Site map

Sections:
Home Page

Gifts & Grants

Fund Raising

Managing Nonprofit Groups

Technology

Philanthropy Today

Jobs

Features:
Guide to Grants

The Nonprofit Handbook

Facts & Figures

Events

Deadlines

The Chronicle in Print:
Current Issue

Back Issues

Sponsored Information
Products & Services:
Directory of Services

Guide to Managing Nonprofits

Continuing-Education Guide

Fund-Raising Services Guide

Technology Guide

Customer Service:
About The Chronicle

How to Contact Us

How to Subscribe

How to Register

Manage Your Account

How to Advertise

Press Inquiries

Feedback

Privacy Policy

User Agreement

Help


The Chronicle of Philanthropy
Opinion

March 29, 2007

Giving Charities the Thumbs Up

Sean Stannard-Stockton, a California philanthropy adviser, has recruited a team of blog writers to share their ideas on how to effectively measure the performance of nonprofit groups.

Mr. Stannard-Stockton, who writes the blog Tactical Philanthropy, calls the roundup of blog postings on a single topic “The Giving Carnival.”

And he’s enlisted writers such as Phil Cubeta, a financial and charitable-giving adviser who runs GiftHub and Albert Ruesga, a foundation officer who writes White Courtesy Telephone to sound off on the topic.

In his posting, Mr. Cubeta points out some of the problems that occur when grant makers place too much emphasis on measuring results.

“I can understand the pressure to do so, to be ‘accountable,’ and to have ‘benchmarks,’ ‘balanced score cards,’ ‘leading indicators,’ and the like,” Mr. Cubeta writes. “But I wonder if outcomes measurement does not lead to unimaginative grants. If the grant maker knows that something has to be measured, won’t the grant be retrofitted to that measurement index?”

Mr. Stannard-Stockton, meanwhile, says charities should be rated qualitatively instead of quantitatively. Instead of forcing nonprofit groups to use specific measurements of progress, donors should instead review charities like Gene Shalit looks at movies.

“This country has a robust movie-rating system that is entirely qualitative,” he writes. “We have an enormous system of professional movie critics who make their ratings public and provide detailed commentary on why they like or dislike each film. There is no reason why a similar system could not be developed for charities.”

What do you think about donors’ push to measure results? What information should be most meaningful to potential supporters? Click on the comment link just below this posting to offer your thoughts.

Peter Panepento

Comments

  1. This Carnival has spurred a lot of debate. I’d like to encourage readers to leave comments on my blog or the blog of the contributing authors. I’ll be highlighting comments on my blog.

    — Sean Stannard-Stockton    Mar 29, 01:30 PM    #

  2. I think the concept of a Carnival, or a Blog Exchange, has the potential to connect people and organizations who might not otherwise be talking. I’ve participated often in the Non Profit Blog Exchange, and am now trying to organize a Tutor/Mentor Blog Exchange that would connect volunteers, leaders, youth and donors who are involved in volunteer-based tutor/mentor programs. You can read about this at http://tutormentor.blogspot.com/2007/03/blog-exchanges-connecting-stakeholders.html

    — Dan Bassill    Mar 29, 06:20 PM    #

Commenting is closed for this article.



Copyright © 2009 The Chronicle of Philanthropy