High-Performance Partnerships - National Academy of Public ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

RESULTS chapter four The Strategies 1. Agree on definitions of success at the outset. Defining success is the first step in getting started. This step may sound simple, but partnerships often fail to complete it in their rush to begin. Partners, funders, and stakeholders must share in identifying the partnership’s desired outcomes and performance measures. The greater the specificity and precision, the greater the likelihood that the partnership will achieve meaningful results and minimize internal conflict. The partnership may employ different strategies for achieving its goal, but the goal should be constant and the methods for evaluating success stable. 2. Consider the mission, and then define the results that achieve it. Linking outcomes to the partnership’s purpose is critical. A clear mission should be the starting point for defining and measuring performance goals. If the goal is to reduce violent crime in a community, defining success based on the murder rate is too limited. The partnership should change its mission to reduce the number of murders in the community, or broaden its performance measure to include all violent crimes. 3. Identify a “family” of performance measures. Partnerships, especially young ones, should focus on a limited number of important outcomes. The “critical few” concept recognizes that a single collaboration—even a high-performance one—cannot be all things to all stakeholders. The partnership must balance its focus with the need to measure success from various perspectives: short-term vs. long-term, qualitative vs. quantitative, and perception vs. reality. Funders may desire one set of outcomes, the community a different set, and individual partners still another. It is very challenging to select a family of measurable outcomes that satisfies everybody but does not spread the partnership’s attention and resources too thin. Outcome targets should balance stretch goals measuring truly extraordinary performance with realistic goals enabling the partnership to celebrate incremental successes. A goal that is too easy to achieve may render collaboration irrelevant to addressing the core issues facing a community. Conversely, a goal that is too aggressive may cause the partnership to fall short and appear ineffective. Baseline data must be captured to evaluate the partnership’s success in achieving results. Over time, performance should be measured against baseline conditions, the partnership’s mission and goals, and similar community or peer group activities. The mission of Milwaukee’s Lapham Park Venture is to create a “supportive continuing care community where low-income older adults can comfortably age in place.” The Venture’s measure of success is that 96 percent of its residents do just that. 68 Powering the Future: High-Performance Partnerships
PROGRAM AREA TABLE 4-2 SAMPLE PERFORMANCE MEASURES OBJECTIVE INPUT OUTPUT EFFICIENCY SERVICE QUALITY OUTCOME Housing To increase the amount of owner-occupied housing in designated neighborhoods from 45% to 60% by 2010. Dollars spent to construct and rehabilitate housing units. Number of new and rehabilitated housing units produced within the designated neighborhoods. Cost per housing unit. Percentage of buyers who felt the quality and value of the housing unit were excellent or good. Percentage of owneroccupied dwelling units in the designated neighborhoods. Child Health Care To reduce number of low birthweight babies as a percentage of live births by 10% in 1999 and 15% in 2000. Expenditures (by program or activity). Number of pregnant women receiving care in first trimester. Cost per woman receiving care in the first trimester. Percentage of women who felt they received good or excellent prenatal care. Number of low birthweight babies as a percentage of live births born in 1999 and 2000. Source: National Association of Counties with additions by Connie Bawcum The various types of performance measures can be confusing. A “Family of Measures” is provided in Table 4-2. For high-performance partnerships, the most important type is outcomes. Not that other measures are unimportant, but they are less indicative of real improvements that are critical to people and communities. The design lab partnerships provide excellent examples of output and outcome measures, as shown in Table 4-3. Both are important in determining success, but the primary focus should be outcomes. TABLE 4-3 EXAMPLES OF OUTPUT VS. OUTCOME MEASURES PARTNERSHIP OUTPUT OUTCOMES Healthy Families Partnership (Hampton) 30,000 children reached in 2002. 2,713 adults participated in parenting classes in 2002. Reduced rate of child abuse and neglect by 26.8 % from 1992-2000. Reduced infant mortality rate from 13.0 per 1000 live births in 1992 to 8.4 in 2000. Medical Care for Children Partnership (Fairfax) 7,140 children served in 2002. 97% of children immunized compared with 73% statewide. Neighborhoods in Bloom (Richmond) 90 vacant, abandoned houses eliminated. Reduced crime in NIB areas by 15% from 2000 to 2002, compared with 5% in the rest of the city. 69 Powering the Future: High-Performance Partnerships
Page 1 and 2:
Powering the FUTURE: High-Performan
Page 3 and 4:
A Report by a Panel of the NATIONAL
Page 5 and 6:
TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD.........
Page 7 and 8:
CHAPTER 12: MANAGEMENT APPROACHES A
Page 9 and 10:
Public Business High Performance Pa
Page 11 and 12:
Medicare and Medicaid health progra
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
FIGURE 1-1 CONTINUUM OF ORGANIZATIO
Page 17 and 18:
Coexistence: Cooperative: Contractu
Page 19 and 20: Business FIGURE 1-3 HIGH-PERFORMANC
Page 21 and 22: “Creating a partnership takes tim
Page 23 and 24: Public Business High Performance Pa
Page 25 and 26: FIGURE 2-2 NONPROFIT SECTOR REVENUE
Page 27 and 28: TABLE 2-1 SECTOR DIFFERENCES Public
Page 29 and 30: eform to establish some form of res
Page 33 and 34: FIGURE 3-1 DESIGN LAB PARTNERSHIPS:
Page 35 and 36: TABLE 3-2 DESIGN LAB — PARTNERSHI
Page 37 and 38: dren. Nine MCCP case managers made
Page 39 and 40: FIGURE 3-5 MEDICAL CARE FOR CHILDRE
Page 41 and 42: “The Healthy Families Partnership
Page 43 and 44: HFP is an excellent model of growin
Page 45 and 46: identifying specific goals and outc
Page 47 and 48: 5 A DAY FOR BETTER HEALTH PROGRAM N
Page 49 and 50: FIGURE 3-8 PUBLIC AWARENESS Percent
Page 51 and 52: esponsible for developing specific
Page 53 and 54: FAMILY STRENGTHENING COALITION INDI
Page 55 and 56: Challenges Despite its solid track
Page 57 and 58: Challenges NBSD encountered some ba
Page 59 and 60: early intervention; and an early ch
Page 61 and 62: CAREGIVER/EMPLOYER PROJECT CENTERS
Page 63 and 64: Medicare insurer, CMS was the ultim
Page 65 and 66: A 1996 survey of La Alma/Lincoln Pa
Page 69: and establishing performance manage
Page 73 and 74: The Lapham Park Venture originally
Page 75 and 76: THE DATA TRAP No partnership can cl
Page 79 and 80: FIGURE 5-1 THE 5 C’S OF EFFECTIVE
Page 81 and 82: SURVIVING TRANSITIONS IN LEADERSHIP
Page 85 and 86: Without a well-documented mission s
Page 87 and 88: FIGURE 6-4 CAREGIVER/EMPLOYER PROGR
Page 89 and 90: FIGURE 6-6 STRATEGIC PLANNING CYCLE
Page 91 and 92: BALANCING FOCUS AND FLEXIBILITY The
Page 95 and 96: Asset mapping is key to determining
Page 97 and 98: 8. Use third-party payment opportun
Page 99 and 100: partners agree that redirection is
Page 101 and 102: Individual governmental units, foun
Page 105 and 106: dedicate resources to effective ong
Page 107 and 108: The business community does not imm
Page 109 and 110: TABLE 8-3 FAMILY STRENGTHENING COAL
Page 113 and 114: Organizations may feel that a partn
Page 115 and 116: The PODER Project was a six-year in
Page 117 and 118: Neighborhoods in Bloom operates in
Page 121 and 122:
Results Characteristics • Derive
Page 123 and 124:
FIGURE 10-2 PHASES OF LEADERSHIP Ma
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
The CMS Employer/Caregiver Workgrou
Page 129 and 130:
Informal communications strategies
Page 131 and 132:
Management Approaches and Attribute
Page 133 and 134:
Public managers tend to be risk ave
Page 135 and 136:
Putting It All Together Chapter13 H
Page 137 and 138:
FIGURE 13-2 ROWING TOGETHER FOR A H
Page 139 and 140:
Appendix A Panel Member Biographies
Page 141 and 142:
Appendix B Selected Bibliography
Page 143 and 144:
National League of Cities. “City
Page 145 and 146:
Appendix C Performance Management G
Page 147 and 148:
Outcomes: The quantified result, or
Page 149 and 150:
Appendix D Design Lab Participants
Page 151 and 152:
Heidi Veltman Reston Kaiser Permane
Page 153 and 154:
America’s Promise Gregg Petersmey
Page 155 and 156:
Appendix E Excerpt from Lapham Park
Page 157 and 158:
LAPHAM PARK VENTURE STRATEGIC PLAN,
Page 159 and 160:
2. Venture Operations Committee PUR
Page 161 and 162:
Appendix F Memorandum of Understand
Page 163 and 164:
ARTICLE I - HIGHLAND PARK SOUTHERN
Page 166:
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF PUBLIC ADMINIST
show all

High-Performance Partnerships - National Academy of Public ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?