1. What Influences the Influence of an Evaluation? Environmental Evaluators Network Helen Davis Picher, William Penn Foundation Andrew Johnson, William Penn Foundation Peter Szabo, Bloomingdale Management Advisors June 24, 2011

2. Overview Hypothesis – Evaluation breakdown Case – Possible way to address Discussion – Your views

3. Hypothesis Strategy ProgramEvaluation The Action Cycle

4. Hypothesis Strategy ProgramEvaluation The Action Cycle

5. Hypothesis Sponsor (Eval Staff) Client (Program Staff) Consultant Subject (Grantees) Key Actors and Dynamics

6. Hypothesis SponsorClient ConsultantSubject Key Actors and Dynamics

7. Case – William Penn Foundation Created in 1945 Private, family foundation Managed by a president and staff of 30 $80 million annual grant budget Focus on greater Philadelphia 2001 strategic plan – new goals, three program areas

8. Case - Before PA NJ

9. Case - Environment & Communities Program Four Funding Priorities: 1. Protect and Conserve Significant Regional Landscapes 2. Protect, Conserve, and Restore Water Resources 3. Improve Regional Prosperity and Competitiveness 4. Revitalize Greater Philadelphia's Urban Core

10. Case - Before PA NJ

11. Case - Before PA NJ

12. Case – Land Protection Work 2003-2005: 22 grants to 14 organizations (over $7.5 million) Types of Support: Capital acquisition funds Technical assistance Advocacy and coalition building Innovative approaches to land protection Cluster Review: Assess land preservation work Understand best practices in the field Get recommendations on how to move forward

13. Case – Evaluation and Follow-On Major findings Capital too diffused for long-term impact Administration – cumbersome Other funders: Forest v. trees

14. Case – Evaluation and Follow-On Major findings Capital too diffused for long-term impact Administration – cumbersome Other funders: Forest v. trees Key responses Narrowed geographic focus Engaged intermediary for capital

15. Case - Before PA NJ

16. Case - After PA NJ

17. Case - After PA NJ

18. Case – Why Evaluation Was Influential SponsorClient ConsultantSubject Key Actors and Dynamics

19. Case – Why Evaluation Was Influential Culture Clarity Communication

20. SponsorClient ConsultantSubject Key Actors and Dynamics Case – Why Evaluation Was Influential Culture Strategic plan Evaluation system Collaboration Senior mgmt interest

21. SponsorClient ConsultantSubject Key Actors and Dynamics Case – Why Evaluation Was Influential Clarity Clear charge to consultant Clear message to grantees

22. SponsorClient ConsultantSubject Key Actors and Dynamics Case – Why Evaluation Was Influential Communication Regular, formal, informal In-person, on-site, respectful

23. Discussion Task Begin with introductions, then Using your own experience as a basis, assess the thinking we have presented on: a)The issues that inhibit the influence of an evaluation b)The actions/conditions that may mitigate these issues How would you build upon these ideas?