Browsing by Subject "outcome measurement"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Account Space: How Accountability Requirements Shape Nonprofit Practice
    (SAGE, 2008-06-01) Benjamin, Lehn M.; School of Philanthropy
    Improving nonprofit accountability is one of the most important issues facing the sector. Improving nonprofit accountability in ways that are attentive to what we might consider unique and valuable about how nonprofits address public problems is the challenge at hand. This article presents a framework for examining the consequences of accountability systems for nonprofit practice. Drawing on empirical findings from three case studies and early sociological work on accounts, the framework considers four questions (i.e., When do organizations give accounts? What is the purpose of the account? When are those accounts accepted or rejected by important stakeholders? And with what consequence?) but makes a distinction between a verification and explanatory accountability process. By making this distinction and clarifying the relationship between these two accountability processes, the proposed framework can be used to identify conflicts between accountability systems and nonprofit practice and to understand how efforts to ensure accountability can spur a change in nonprofit practice, change stakeholder expectations for nonprofits or leave both intact.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Brain Injury Functional Outcome Measure (BI-FOM): A Single Instrument Capturing the Range of Recovery in Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury
    (Elsevier, 2021-01) Whyte, John; Giacino, Joseph T.; Heinemann, Allen W.; Bodien, Yelena; Hart, Tessa; Sherer, Mark; Whiteneck, Gale G.; Mellick, David; Hammond, Flora M.; Semik, Patrick; Rosenbaum, Amy; Nakase Richardson, Risa; Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine
    Objective To develop a measure of global functioning after moderate-severe TBI with similar measurement precision but a longer measurement range than the FIM. Design Phase 1: retrospective analysis of 5 data sets containing FIM, Disability Rating Scale, and other assessment items to identify candidate items for extending the measurement range of the FIM; Phase 2: prospective administration of 49 candidate items from phase 1, with Rasch analysis to identify a unidimensional scale with an extended range. Setting Six TBI Model System rehabilitation hospitals. Participants Individuals (N=184) with moderate-severe injury recruited during inpatient rehabilitation or at 1-year telephone follow-up. Interventions Participants were administered the 49 assessment items in person or via telephone. Main Outcome Measures Item response theory parameters: item monotonicity, infit/outfit statistics, and Factor 1 variance. Results After collapsing misordered rating categories and removing misfitting items, we derived the Brain Injury Functional Outcome Measure (BI-FOM), a 31-item assessment instrument with high reliability, greatly extended measurement range, and improved unidimensionality compared with the FIM. Conclusions The BI-FOM improves global measurement of function after moderate-severe brain injury. Its high precision, relative lack of floor and ceiling effects, and feasibility for telephone follow-up, if replicated in an independent sample, are substantial advantages.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Nonprofit Performance: Accounting for the Agency of Clients
    (Sage, 2015-10) Benjamin, Lehn M.; Campbell, David; School of Philanthropy
    Performance is a key concern for nonprofits providing human services. Yet our understanding of what drives performance remains incomplete. Existing outcome measurement systems track the programmatic activities staff complete and the extent to which participants respond in programmatically intended ways. However, clients do not just receive services and respond as intended and staff do not simply complete program activities. Drawing on a data set of 47 interviews with frontline staff in eight human service nonprofits, we show how frontline staff work in a partnership with clients to set an agenda for change and achieve desired results. We call this co-determination work and argue that it represents a critical and often neglected dimension of nonprofit performance.