A principle in program design is that, if a program is placed in a new location, the program will still perform as expected.

From a program evaluation perspective, we understand that a program’s location presents both challenges and opportunities, as the physical location (whether it’s an actual neighborhood or virtual) is often as unique as the program itself.

So, when you’re evaluating a multi-site program, not only are you assessing the extent that differences in outcomes are due to variations in project implementation, you’re also sensitive to the fact that you’re doing a side-by-side comparison.

Why? Because if you’re a staff member that’s been placed in this new program location, and you’re experiencing the uniques characteristics and quirks of the program’s location in real time, the evaluation can yield results that you’re already aware of. Plus, you’ve most likely informed your staff’s leadership well before the evaluator showed up and this can be frustrating when you need leadership’s help in addressing issues and you’re not being listened to.

A program in multiple locations may have the same outcome goals, but will always be impacted by the conditions it’s operating in.

Every organization has unique needs, capacities, and challenges. Yet funders often make .”one size fits all” requests”. From organizational priorities and resource constraints to lack of internal buy-in and strict accountability, grantees can become resentful of funders when they’re expected to fit into a box as opposed to working together in ways that are flexible and makes sense to both the funder and the grantee.

Funders should let go of one-size-fits-all solutions and play a more crucial role in providing support and guidance to their grantees. They can do this by:

Listen to grantees

Actively listen to grantees’ needs and preferences. By understanding individual and collective unique context and challenges, funders can tailor their support to be more relevant and impactful. This support can look like training, workshops, general guidance, coaching, and access to resources that introduce various tools, approaches, and best practices for articulating program goals and align with grantees’ needs.

Shift away from project-based funding to general operating support

Providing general operating support helps grantees focus on using the funds where needed to support capacity-building that enhances their program planning and evaluation capabilities. It’s easier to do this when you listen to grantees. Project-based funding doesn’t work as grantees will prioritize scrambling to find more funding instead of just doing the work.

Co-create flexible reporting requirements

Instead of rigidly mandating specific tools like logic models, funders can allow grantees to use the tools and methods that best suit their organizational culture and context. Everyone doesn’t need or want an evaluation report, when infographics, storytelling, and other methods of sharing findings can work based on the communities a grantee works with. Instead of focusing solely on reporting formatting, emphasize the importance of defining clear program goals, measuring outcomes, and demonstrating impact, regardless of the specific tools used.

Encourage cross-learning and improvement

By encouraging a learning and collaborative environment, funders can facilitate opportunities for grantees to share their experiences, successes, and challenges in articulating program goals.

Key takeaway

There’s no one-size-fits-all solution for working with grantees. By listening to grantees, understanding their unique needs and challenges, and centering collaborative solutions, funders can foster a more supportive and collaborative grantee-funder relationship.

Raise Your Voice: How can you embrace moving away from “one-size-fits-all” solutions? Share your thoughts below in the comments section.

Was this useful? Subscribe to the Raise Your Voice newsletter, and explore my consulting services.