Introduction
Most boards want to ensure that the outcomes they achieve are improving or maintaining the quality of life for their members or clients. Unfortunately, quality is defined differently in different settings. Therefore, it is almost impossible to copy definitions of quality from other boards and assume the one chosen will be satisfactory in one’s own setting.
The previous blog article discussed the importance of defining quality. This article reviews the importance of setting standards, ensuring that monitoring systems produce reliable data, and using data to take corrective action.
Setting Standards
It is not unusual to hear that programs/services have no standards or if they do these do not apply in ‘our’ case. Even with these arguments, it is possible to set standards and expectations. The board can use the four statements below when working with the Executive Director to set standards.
Quality of actual programs and services provided
Based on the available information, there are several things that can be reported. Examples include; what were the specific components of the programs and services, the associated time frames, attendance rates, completion rates, and definition of quality of instruction/care.
Quality of processes used and outcomes achieved
The organization can use the following data in its report to the board:
- Inputs
- Activities and the associated time frames
- Factors which prevented aspects of programs or services from being delivered as intended
- Factors which enabled the programs or services to exceed their initial benchmarks
- The end results and how these were measured.
Quality of impact on the recipients
It is possible to look at the impact on the total population served in each program or service and the impact on each individual person. These stories can provide specific examples of how the program or service enhanced each person’s life in areas such as:
- Quality of life
- Ability to be independent
- Education
- Social abilities
- Problem solving abilities
- Existing network of resources, friends or colleagues.
Quality of life for the clients and their significant others
Sometimes those people in the client’s life will benefit as much from programs and services provided as the client himself. In these cases, it may be essential to assess the effects of the client and those in his immediate environments. The impact can be seen in a variety of ways
- Physical
- Social
- Emotional
- Financial
- Spiritual
- Recreational
- Professional..
Careful consideration of those four areas does take considerable time. However, the role of the Executive Director is to provide data which would assist the board in making critical strategic decisions when choosing among competing priorities.
Ensuring Monitoring Systems Produce Reliable Data
One thing that not-for-profit boards often complain about is lack of resources. In such cases they can take a lesson from the Robin Hood Foundation. Billionaire Paul Tudor Jones says that yearly the Foundation withdraw funding from five to 10 percent of the organizations to which they previously provided funding because they cannot demonstrate measurable outcomes.
Not-for-profit boards are competing for funding from governments and foundations and/or donations from private citizens and companies. Therefore, it is vital to establish monitoring systems, even if they are not complex, to gather data essential to prove their worth to donors and funders.
Using Data to Take Corrective Action
It is essential to ensure corrective action is an automatic part of any quality initiative. There are at least four reasons why corrective action may not be taken. These include
- Everybody thinks it is someone else’s role
- Nobody wants to be seen as the ‘bad’ guy
- Focusing on the symptoms rather than finding the real problem/issue
- Blaming rather than being proactive
Everybody thinks it is someone else’s role
Often plans identify who has to do what and when. They do not specify who has the responsibility to take corrective action as soon as issues arise. They often blame people rather than standing up and saying “I think I am the person who should be accountable for taking corrective action in this particular project/instance.”
How often do we hear people say, “I thought you were doing that.” Good strategies note what needs to be done, by whom, timelines, financial commitments and who is responsible for corrective action.
Nobody wants to be seen as the ‘bad’ guy
It is easy to take the credit when things are going well. Successful not-for-profit organizations hire individuals who are willing to make decisions, keep work on track and maintain their focus on the desired outcomes. These individuals are not willing to be distracted from this responsibility.
Focusing on the symptoms rather than finding the real problem/issue
It is imperative that the responsible person understands how to isolate the root cause of a problem from the symptoms. Fixing the symptoms does nothing to support the goals of the board and the long-term sustainability of the organization. Often symptoms mask the real issue and not-for-profit entities need individuals who can simultaneously think ‘outside the box,’ look ‘inside the box,’ and see the problem/issue from multiple perspectives.
Blaming rather than being proactive
The best minds will not think of everything during any planning phase. Sometimes, we do not think of specifics until a cue is presented. Other times, circumstances occur which could not have been predicted. The best decision makers do not get caught in the blame game. They focus on issues, evaluate variables, consider options available to them, evaluate the associated risks and make the best decisions possible. They focus on the goals and provide support to individuals involved. The last thing they do is blame others. They know that people who work in the shadow of blame do not put their best efforts forward. They hesitate.
That is not what is needed. Knowing this, they keep focused and clear about the desires of the board.
Final Note
This article discussed the importance of defining quality, setting standards, ensuring monitoring systems produce reliable data, and using data to take corrective action. Each topic contains information essential for board discussions. The Executive Director can provide critical information to assist the board and ensure the not-for-profit continues to obtain the funding required to meet its mandate.
