Common ground – aka “common knowledge”, “mutual knowledge ...
Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf
-
Upload
siaassociation -
Category
Business
-
view
190 -
download
1
description
Transcript of Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf
![Page 1: Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022061203/547de061b4af9fc16b8b4601/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
v
WORKING TOGETHER TO MEASURE IMPACTANNE KAZIMIRSKI, NPC
SIAA conference, Cergy-Pontoise, 10th December 2013
![Page 2: Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022061203/547de061b4af9fc16b8b4601/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
TRANSFORMING THE UK CHARITY SECTOR
2
NPC works at the nexus between charities and
funders
Charity
SectorFunder
Increasing the impact of charities
eg, impact-focused theories of change
Strengthening the partnership
Eg, collaboration towards shared
goals
Increasing the impact of funders
eg, effective commissioning
ConsultancyThink tank
![Page 3: Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022061203/547de061b4af9fc16b8b4601/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
• Charities and social enterprises under pressure to demonstrate impact
• New funding mechanisms require robust and comparable measurement
• But:
• Impact information is often of low quality, not embedded, not easily comparable, and rarely standardised
• Charities are spending resources developing custom measurement frameworks and tools
• Shared measurement is a potential solution
BACKGROUND
![Page 4: Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022061203/547de061b4af9fc16b8b4601/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
WHAT IS SHARED MEASUREMENT?
Shared measurement is using common tools to track outcomes across similar organisations and settings:
• a process: understanding a sector’s shared outcomes
• a product: any tool used by more than one organisation to measure impact.
![Page 5: Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022061203/547de061b4af9fc16b8b4601/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
WHO HAS TRIED TO IMPLEMENT SHARED MEASUREMENT?
Reviews 13 attempts at implementing shared measurement
![Page 6: Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022061203/547de061b4af9fc16b8b4601/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
HOW DO YOU SUCCESSFULLY IMPLEMENT SHARED MEASUREMENT WITHIN A SECTOR?
![Page 7: Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022061203/547de061b4af9fc16b8b4601/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
IS SHARED MEASUREMENT A GOOD IDEA?
Disadvantages
• Takes time to agree on shared values and goals
• Doesn’t reflect nuances of different organisations
• May not meet funder / commissioner requirements
• Risk comparing apples: oranges
• Reputational risk of comparability
• Data protection prevents sharing
Advantages
• Saves time and resources
• Reduces duplication in reporting
• Improves standards of impact measurement
• Externally validates impact data
• Promotes system thinking
• Allows comparing what works best for whom
![Page 8: Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022061203/547de061b4af9fc16b8b4601/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
• Funded by the UK government to develop a toolkit that will measure the outcomes of rehabilitation services
• Partnership with an academic institute and several charities
• Toolkit is for prison and post-prison programmes focusing on offenders’ relationships with their family and with their peers
OFFENDERS’ FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS
![Page 9: Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022061203/547de061b4af9fc16b8b4601/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
![Page 10: Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022061203/547de061b4af9fc16b8b4601/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
![Page 11: Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022061203/547de061b4af9fc16b8b4601/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
PROJECT PROCESS
Evidence review – identifying outcomes and toolkits
Consultation with providers & commissioners to select outcomes to focus on
Development and piloting of toolkit
Consultation with providers & commissioners to inform guidance
Analysis and reporting
![Page 12: Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022061203/547de061b4af9fc16b8b4601/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
DEVELOPMENT OF RELATIONSHIPS TOOLKIT
• Desistance theory:
• Link between creation/ investment in family relationships / reduction in peer pressure with reduced offending
• Consultation:
• Outcomes differed depending on the type of intervention & beneficiary
• Needed to reach a balance between being prescriptive and allowing for flexibility
• We researched existing scales and evaluations in each outcome area and prioritised:
• good validity and reliability; recently developed; brevity.
Toolkit: 25 standardised scales. For each outcome area: short general scales & longer specialised scales.
![Page 13: Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022061203/547de061b4af9fc16b8b4601/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
RELATIONSHIPS TOOLKIT STRUCTURE
We have identified 5 areas of outcomes shown below, supplemented by a personal development module developed by a parallel project:
Partner relationships
Child relationshipsWider family relationships
ParentingPeer
relationships
Personal development
![Page 14: Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022061203/547de061b4af9fc16b8b4601/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
OUTCOME AREAS
Partner relationships
Increased satisfaction with partner relationship, reduced conflict and improved commitment.
Child relationships
Quality of relationships with children, children’s well-being and behaviour.
Wider family relationships
Family functioning, resilience, conflict and communication, satisfaction with relationships in the family and quality of relationships
Parenting
Improved satisfaction with the parent-child relationship and parenting skills
Peer relationships
Satisfaction with peer relationships and reduction of negative peer relationships.
![Page 15: Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022061203/547de061b4af9fc16b8b4601/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
CHARACTERISTICS OF TOOLKIT
• The questions can be used as monitoring or as part of an evaluation with a ‘before and after’ (pre/post) research design, with a comparison group where possible
Before measure
After measure
Programme / service
Before measure
After measure
“Intervention” group
“Comparison” group
![Page 16: Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022061203/547de061b4af9fc16b8b4601/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
PILOTING DESIGN
Agreeing outcome areas and scales to include
Agreeing demographics/ risk factor questions
Tailoring to client population and service
Agreeing timing of post-questionnaires
Materials include:• Tailored pre and post questionnaires• Data collection sheets• Staff and client information sheets• Consent procedure
The timing of the post-questionnaires varies by provider, from one month to two.
Initial pilot feedback:• Suitability of peer relationship questions for older offenders• Capturing the end of negative partner relationships for women offenders
![Page 17: Common Ground - Anne Kazimirski.pdf](https://reader033.fdocuments.in/reader033/viewer/2022061203/547de061b4af9fc16b8b4601/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
DISCUSSION
Working together across your sector to develop a shared measurement approach:
• What are/ would be the main challenges?
• What are the solutions to these challenges?