Rochester Effectiveness Partnership (1996-2004)

 

Provider Partners

Action for a Better

     Community/Rochester

     City School District

Aesthetic Education

     Institute

Catholic Family Center

Community Place of

     Greater Rochester

Compeer

Cornell Cooperative

     Extension

Epilepsy Foundation

GCASA

Girl Scouts of Genesee

     Valley

The Health Association

Hillside Work-Scholarship

     Connection

Humane Society

Learning Disabilities

     Association

Legal Aid Society

LIFESPAN

Monroe-2 Orleans BOCES

National Multiple Sclerosis

     Society

Neighborhood Housing

     Services of Rochester

Norman Howard School

Planned Parenthood

Society for the Protection

      and Care of Children

Sojourner House

Threshold

Urban League of Rochester

Wayne ARC

YWCA of Rochester &

     Monroe County

 

Funding Partners

Bruner Foundation

Golisano Foundation

Daisy Marquis Jones

     Foundation

Frontier

Monroe County

City of Rochester

Rochester Area Community

     Foundation

Seligman Family Fund

United Way of Greater

     Rochester

Wegmans Food Markets

 

Associate Funders

Halcyon Hill Foundation

Rochester AmeriCorps

Peter & Elizabeth C. Tower

     Foundation

 

Assisting Partner

Advertising Council of

     Rochester

 

Administrative Partner

Rochester Grantmakers

     Forum

 

Evaluation Partners

Anita Baker Consulting

InnoNet

Kim Sabo Consulting

Overview

The Rochester Effectiveness Partnership (REP) was a collaboration among Rochester area funders, nonprofits, evaluators and several service organizations to provide indepth, high-quality training in participatory evaluation, followed by consistent coaching that was enduring enough to result in significant practice changes. Over its 8-year history, the Rochester Effectiveness Partnership program involved 52 institutional partners represented by over 230 people. In addition, REP periodically offered one-time learning opportunities that helped the broader community of funders and service providers think more clearly about their work and focus on effectiveness.   REP created a unique model for collaboration, one that enabled funders, providers and evaluation professionals to become true partners, benefiting from each other's knowledge and skills. The program evaluated itself each year and had an independent evaluation in 2000. The executive summaries are linked below.

Additional Information

 Rochester Effectiveness Partnership Evaluation Summaries (PDF)

1997 Executive Summary, Year One Report

1998-1999 Executive Summary

2000 Summary Report

2000 InnoNet Evaluation Report

2002 Evaluation Report

2003 Final Evaluation Report, Executive Summary

The Bruner Foundation was a major funder and participant in the Rochester Effectiveness Partnership. The Foundation extended the work begun with REP in their EthOS project. For more detailed information about the REP program and the Bruner Foundation's continued focus on evaluation, please visit their website.

Participatory Evaluation

REP used participatory evaluation as its primary learning vehicle. What does the term, participatory evaluation, mean? Here are a few illustrations.

"Participatory evaluation aims to create a learning process for the program recipients that will help them in their effort to reach desired goals."
D. Greenwood and M. Levin, Introduction to Action Research, 1998, p. 239.

"Participatory evaluation is a process of self-assessment, collective knowledge production, and cooperative action in which the stakeholders in a development intervention participate substantively in the identification of the evaluation issues, the design of the evaluation, the collection and analysis of the data, and the action taken as a result of the evaluation findings."
E. T. Jackson and Y. Kassam, Knowledge Shared, 1998, p. 3.

"One of the negative connotations often associated with evaluation is that it is something done to people. One is evaluated. Participatory evaluation, in contrast, is a process controlled by the people in the program or community. It is something they undertake as a formal, reflective process for their own development and empowerment."
M. Patton, Qualitative Evaluation Methods, (2nd ed,), 1990, p. 129.

These definitions are excerpted from the introduction to a guide to participatory evaluation developed by Annalisa Lewis Raymer, a Ph.D. candidate at Cornell University's Dept. of Education. For more information.

REP Training Description

 

  • Provider Classes

Classes met 30 times over 18 months (10 times every 6 months). Trainee teams from provider partners learned approaches to participatory evaluation, created and implemented an evaluation design for one program, developed a report on lessons learned, and began applying learnings to their work with intensive coaching. They then applied what they learned to strengthen their evaluated program's outcomes; and supported the extended use of evaluation throughout their agency. In 8 years, REP hosted seven classes.

 

  • Alumni Study Group

Individuals who completed the class training could join the alumni study group for continued coaching from REP's professional evaluators. The alumni study group met once a month. Teams continued to work on their evaluation projects and frequently came together to do other projects as a group.

 

  • CEO Training and Consulting

All CEOs of organizations involved with REP, including funders, were encouraged to attend the CEO training which was held in four meetings each year. This was the CEO's opportunity to learn about the process and benefits of participatory evaluation. In addition, provider and funding partners received up to 5 hours of individual consulting time with REP's professional evaluators.

 

  • Funders Study Group

This group was open to all REP funders and met monthly. The group discussed issues affecting nonprofit service delivery in the Rochester area, shared their individual evaluations, performed studies to determine best practices and hosted invited speakers on topics of mutual interest.

  • Governance Team

This team shaped the activities and direction of REP and met six times each year.  Each REP partner had one vote on the Governance Team. CEOs were expected to attend.

  • Ripple Training

A 3-hour training was offered each year to partner organization staff, board members and volunteers who could benefit from learning more about participatory evaluation and its application in their organizations. This training reinforced the goal of the program to extend the use of participatory evaluation throughout partner organizations.

  • Annual Partner/Community Conference

Each year REP partners came together to share the results of their learning in poster sessions and extend their knowledge of evaluation through targeted concurrent sessions. In years when new REP classes were accepted, the nonprofit community was invited to attend the conference as a tool for community awareness and recruitment.

For other examples of the application of participatory evaluation, visit:

Community Based Public Health Policy & Practice (PDF)

The Nonprofit Quarterly

Participatory Evaluation – information compiled by L. Coffin

United Nations Development Programme

UN Food and Agriculture Organization

USAID Center for Development Information and Evaluation (PDF)

 

 

Rochester Effectiveness Partnership

c/o Grantmakers Forum of New York

919 Winton Road South,

Rochester, NY 14618-1633

phone 585.232.2380     

fax 585.232.8413     

email   gfny@grantmakers.org

www.grantmakers.org