Expertise in Program Assessment Lacking at Nonprofits and Foundations, Survey Says

Nonprofits lack the knowledge and resources needed to assess the results of their work, according to a new survey of foundation program officers that paints an unflattering portrait of the state of evaluation in philanthropy.

The survey by the Center for Effective Philanthropy found that 61 percent of 150 randomly selected foundation program officers gave poor marks to nonprofits’ assessment efforts, and just 9 percent of respondents said nonprofits have the resources necessary to assess program results.

Nearly half of program officers — 47 percent — said they themselves lack the knowledge necessary to help grantees assess their results. Yet only 16 percent said they wanted more professional-development training in evaluation.

Kris Putnam-Walkerly, president of the Putnam Consulting Group, attributed a lack of evaluation resources to “a poverty mentality” prevalent at charities and foundations.

“Nonprofits are often fearful of, quite frankly, asking for the funding they truly need to conduct an evaluation. They might ask for $10,000 but they need $50,000 to do it well,” she said.

Foundations need to stop issuing “unfunded mandates,” said Caroline Altman Smith, deputy director of education for the Kresge Foundation, who helped to design the survey questions.

“If you’re going to require evaluation as part of the work you’re funding, you need to be willing to pay for it,” she says.

Unreasonable expectations on the part of program officers might stem from the fact that many are subject-matter experts with little training in data collection and analysis, Ms. Putnam-Walkerly said. She recommends that more foundations consider hiring evaluation directors, as did the California Wellness Foundation, or create entire measurement divisions, like the Center for Evaluation Innovation at the David and Lucile Packard Foundation.

The program officers surveyed work at foundations that give more than $5 million a year. The study was intended to create benchmarks for program officers’ roles and responsibilities because individual officers have so much influence over grantees’ experiences. For example, 68 percent of those surveyed said they are very involved in deciding whether a grant is awarded, and 62 percent said they have a major role in deciding the size of grants.

‘A Pretty Good Gig’

Other survey findings were more positive. More than 90 percent of respondents believe their careers are meaningful, have positive effects, and contribute to their personal growth.

“Overall, I think the results show that being a program officer is a pretty good gig,” Ms. Altman Smith said.

Yet she was concerned that only 16 percent of respondents said they feel they have a career path for advancement, especially because fewer than half — 48 percent — said they plan to continue working in philanthropy.

“Foundations need to be more purposeful about creating career paths,” especially for younger employees, she said.

Answering an open-ended question, more than half of respondents named developing and maintaining relationships with grantees as the parts of their jobs most essential to maximizing their effectiveness.

“Program officers are saying loud and clearly that building strong relationships with grantees is important,” Ms. Altman Smith said. “It’s really gratifying to hear how important they think relationships are. Grantees really value high-quality time.”

The demographic breakdown of survey respondents offers some insight on the backgrounds of program officers at large and midsized foundations:

• Gender: 74 percent women, 23 percent men, 3 percent no answer.

• Race: 63 percent white, 10 percent black, 8 percent Hispanic, 7 percent multiracial, 5 percent Asian, 1 percent Native American, 1 percent Pacific Islander.

• Job experience: 79 percent previously worked for nonprofits, 37 percent for the government, 36 percent for corporations, and 28 percent for other foundations.

• Education: doctorate, 11 percent; master’s degree, 59 percent; professional degree, 3 percent; bachelor’s degree, 26 percent; other, 1 percent.

• Tenure in current role: 13 percent less than one year; 37 percent between one and three years; 21 percent between three and six years; 15 percent between six and 10 years; 14 percent more than 10 years.

Clarification: Due to an editing error, the first paragraph of this article has been revised to more precisely describe the survey’s findings.