Upload
john-kamensky
View
932
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Citation preview
04/10/23 Jeff Tryens, Measures Matter 1
Characteristics of Indicator Programs that Engage Partners
Effectively
A presentation by Jeff Tryens
Measures Matter to the
Greater Portland-Vancouver Regional Indicators Advisory Team
27 September, 2010Portland State University
04/10/23 Jeff Tryens, Measures Matter 2
Background: Regional Indicators for Greater Portland
Metro (the Portland-area regional government) in cooperation with the Institute for Metropolitan Studies at Portland State University is developing a new set of greater Portland/Vancouver (WA) indicators (http://www.pdx.edu/ims/indicators/).
This presentation was intended to provide the advisory committee overseeing the project with information about how “successful” indicator programs engage partners in the use of their data. The findings are drawn from a survey conducted during the summer of 2010.
04/10/23 Jeff Tryens, Measures Matter 3
27 programs were chosen that…
1. are intended to improve community well-being;
2. use community-level indicators to inform, engage, intervene, or fund;
3. are considered at least somewhat successful; and
4. represent a broad cross-section of types and locations.
04/10/23 Jeff Tryens, Measures Matter 4
METHODOLOGY: Effectiveness was judged exclusively on respondent self-
assessments.Effectiveness was assessed against
seven program aspects:1. Improving well-being in the community;2. Engaging partners/stakeholders -
a) overall;b) through indicator development/revision;c) through incentives/requirements;d) through communication strategies;e) through encouraging collaboration; and
3. Linking with similar programs in the area.
04/10/23 Jeff Tryens, Measures Matter 5
METHODOLOGY: Self-assessed effectiveness in engaging partners was the key comparator.
• 11 respondents considered their programs very effective at engaging partners, overall.
•They were compared with the 16 others that rated themselves somewhat effective at engaging partners, overall.
04/10/23 Jeff Tryens, Measures Matter 6
Programs that say they partner very effectively are more likely to be in business to…..• inform sponsors about community issues;
• influence sponsors’ decision making;
• spur community action;
• facilitate public/private alignment; and
• facilitate systems thinking.
They are less likely to be in business to….
• increase public awareness.
04/10/23 Jeff Tryens, Measures Matter 7
OVERSIGHT: Programs that say they partner very effectively are more likely to say that……
•community indicators are central to their programs;
•overseers are very familiar with program information; and
•overseers use program information.
04/10/23 Jeff Tryens, Measures Matter 8
INDICATORS: Programs that say they partner very effectively are much more
likely to…..•involve partners in periodic updates ;
•have regular dialogues with partners about data; and
•regularly solicit suggestions for change.
All programs are likely to….
•involve partners in initial selection of indicators.
04/10/23 Jeff Tryens, Measures Matter 9
Yes No
While both levels of effectiveness tend to encourage partners to collaborate…..
Very effectiveSomewhat effective
04/10/23 Jeff Tryens, Measures Matter 1020% 40%0% 60% 80%
….the more successful ones tend to do more types of collaboration, more often.
Very effective
Somewhat effective
04/10/23 Jeff Tryens, Measures Matter 11
COMMUNICATION: Very effective partnering programs are more extensive users of…..
• interactive websites (67% vs. 27%) and
• gatherings (45% vs. 7%).
And they are more likely to communicate extensively or moderately by….
• news feeds;• social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.);• blogs; and• memos.
04/10/23 Jeff Tryens, Measures Matter 12
But even with the very effective partnering groups, there’s no silver bullet.
• Only half say they are very effective at engaging partners in indicator development.
• Only half say they are very effective at engaging partners in collaborations.
• Just one-third say they are very effective at communicating with partners.
• Just one-third (of a small base) say their incentives or requirements are very effective at engaging others.
• And just half say they are very effective at improving community well-being, overall.
04/10/23 Jeff Tryens, Measures Matter 13
Two types of programs tend to consider themselves much more effective at
partnering.• Programs that are primarily funded by
foundations.
• Programs that have the combined purposes of engagement and performance improvement.
04/10/23 Jeff Tryens, Measures Matter 14
• Generally, groups that are very effective at partnering don’t employ strategies that are different from groups that are less effective, they just do more of it.
• Very effective groups do tend to rely more on direct engagement with partners – gatherings, collaborative events, targeted communication – than less effective groups.
• Very effective groups tend to have some form of partner accountability or performance improvement as part of their program purpose.
Take Away
04/10/23 Jeff Tryens, Measures Matter 15
For more information on the survey, contact:
Jeff TryensMeasures Matter
Questions?