Struggling to Get It Right

• Published date: 01 March 2017
• Date: 01 March 2017
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21249

335

N M  L, vol. 27, no. 3, Spring 2017 © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/nml.21249

Journal sponsored by the Jack, Joseph and Morton Mandel School of Applied Social Sciences, Case Western Reserve University.

Struggling to Get It Right

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT CHALLENGES AND

STRATEGIES FOR ADDRESSING THEM AMONG FUNDERS OF

HUMAN SERVICES

David A. Campbell, 1 Kristina T. Lambright 1

1 Binghamton University

This article examines the challenges public and nonprofit human service funders face in

the performance measurement process and the strategies they use to address these challenges.

We use survey and interview data to compare funders’ experiences across a region. Com-

mon challenges included dissatisfaction with formal data collection procedures, difficulty

getting providers to comply with reporting requirements, provider performance problems,

and lack of capacity to use performance information. Capacity issues were a greater concern

for smaller funders. Funders used a variety of strategies to address challenges. Use of some

strategies depended on context. Practices were relatively consistent across funder groups.

Keywords: management , principal , agency theory , stewardship theory , foundations

MANY RECENT STUDIES have documented the proliferation of performance measure-

ment in human services (see, for example, Campbell, Lambright, and Bronstein 2012 ; Car-

man 2007 , 2009 ; Hatry 2014 ; LeRoux and Wright 2010 ). Recently published, best-selling

books written for popular audiences, lionizing nonprofi ts with strong measurement cultures

and advocating for a greater results orientation in the sector, refl ect this trend (Kristof and

WuDunn 2014 ; Stern 2013 ). Funders account for at least some of the growth in perfor-

mance measurement; they have an interest in understanding how the providers they support

use the resources given to them and the extent to which these providers are able to meet

performance goals. Many researchers have found performance measurement expectations

and processes are funder driven (see, for example, Carman 2011 ; Ebrahim 2005 ; Froelich

1999 ; Mayhew 2012 ). Yet research on performance measurement has focused on providers

(Barman and MacIndoe 2012 ; Carman 2007 ; Carman and Fredericks 2010 ; Eckerd and

Moulton 2011 ), specifi c subgroups of providers (Carman and Fredericks 2010 ), or individual

organizations (Carnochan et al. 2014 ;  omson 2011 ).

Researchers have shown less interest in funder experiences with performance measurement. A

few studies have considered leading foundations (Brock, Buteau, and Herring 2012 ; Buteau

and Chu 2011 ; Greenwalt 2013 ), a relatively small subset of nonprofit human services

Correspondence to: David Campbell, Binghamton University, Public Administration, College of Community Aff airs, P.O.

Box 6000, 4400 Vestal Parkway, Binghamton, NY 13902–6000. E-mail: dcamp@binghamton.edu.

Nonprofi t Management & Leadership DOI: 10.1002/nml

336 CAMPBELL, LAMBRIGHT

funders. Other researchers studying local governments have investigated this aspect of human

services, although their work emphasizes contract management rather than performance

measurement (Van Slyke 2003 , 2007 ). Most existing studies on the challenges human service

funders face in the performance measurement process examined the experiences of one type

of funder: they do not compare the challenges different types of funders face nor do they

compare the strategies different types of funders use to address these challenges. Further,

those who have studied funder experiences tend to examine either performance measurement

challenges (such as Buteau, Buchanan, and Gopal 2013 ; Nicholson-Crotty, Theobold, and

Nicholson-Crotty 2006 ) or strategies (such as Girth 2014 ; Marvel and Marvel 2009 ) used to

address those challenges, and not both.

The limited research on funder experiences is surprising and important for two reasons. First,

leaders in the field have debated the value, strengths, and limitations of performance mea-

surement and have directed their comments at funders as its initiators (Berger 2013 ; Scham-

bra 2013 ). Without a better understanding of funder experiences, we cannot assess whether

performance measurement is delivering value for funders, and, if it is not, what funders can

do to address those limitations. Second, separately discussing challenges and the strategies

funders use to address them leaves us with incomplete knowledge of performance measure-

ment, making it difficult to assess the conditions under which funders are likely to adopt

an agency or stewardship approach to performance measurement. New research that focuses

specifically on human service funders’ experiences with performance measurement can

address these gaps in our knowledge. We provide further insights by considering the experi-

ences of public and nonprofit funders together, assessing similarities and differences in their

approach. In this article, we are specifically interested in addressing the following questions:

• What types of performance information are funders requesting and why do they request it?

• What challenges do funders face in the performance measurement process? Do diff erent

types of funders report diff erent challenges?

• What strategies do funders use to address challenges? Do diff erent types of funders use dif-

ferent strategies?

This research, in combination with ongoing work about the experiences of providers and

service beneficiaries, can be used to help improve human service performance measurement

practices. It also provides a foundation for future research that considers whether or how dif-

ferent funder groups influence each other ’ s approach to performance measurement. As a final

note, our focus here is performance measurement, which we distinguish from program evalu-

ation. The former involves the systematic collection and analysis of a range of information

about program accomplishments while the latter is narrower in scope and addresses whether

a program intervention accomplishes specific goals (see Hatry 2013 , for a detailed descrip-

tion of these differences).

How Funders of Nonprofi t Organizations

Approach Performance Measurement

Because the goal of this article is to consider the performance measurement experiences of

three different categories of institutional funders (private foundations, public charities, and

local governments), our literature review considered research on each of them (though public