An Assessment of the Compassion Capital Fund Targeted Capacity Building Program:
Findings from a Retrospective Survey of Grantees
June 2008
Prepared for:
Administration for Children and Families
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Prepared by:
Barbara Fink
Cynthia Sipe
Branch Associates, Inc.
123 S. Broad Street
Suite 2030
Philadelphia, PA 19109
An Assessment of the Compassion Capital Fund Targeted Capacity Building Program: Findings from a Retrospective Survey of Grantees
Background
The Compassion Capital Fund (CCF) is a key component of President Bush's Faith-Based and Community Initiative. CCF helps faith-based and community organizations (FBCOs) increase their effectiveness and enhance their ability to provide social services by building their organizational capacity. Established in 2002 by Congressional appropriation, CCF is administered through the Office of Community Services (OCS), Administration for Children and Families (ACF), within the Department of Health and Human Services. CCF is designed to be used to strengthen critical areas of organizational capacity such as leadership development, organizational development, program development, and community partnerships.
CCF encompasses three grant programs: the Demonstration program, the Communities Empowering Youth program, and the Targeted Capacity Building program.
Through the Demonstration program, OCS funds grants to experienced intermediary organizations that provide training, technical assistance, and financial support to grassroots faith-based and community organizations in order to increase their organizational capacity. Benefits and effectiveness of the Demonstration program's intermediary model are being evaluated through two separate studies. The first, an outcomes study, involves intermediaries awarded grants between federal fiscal year (FY) 2003 and FY 2005 and the FBCOs they assist. The second, an impact study which utilizes experimental design, is being conducted with intermediaries awarded funds in FY 2006 and the FBCOs they assist.
A second CCF component, the Communities Empowering Youth (CEY) program, builds the capacity of faith-based and community collaborations working to reduce gang involvement and youth violence and foster positive youth development. CEY grants were first awarded in FY 2006. The capacity building achievements of the organizations participating in the CEY program will be assessed through an outcomes study beginning in FY 2008.
The third program under CCF, the Targeted Capacity Building program (informally known as the "mini-grant" program), provides grants directly to faith-based and community grassroots organizations to increase their capacity to serve specified social service priority areas. This program awards up to $50,000 to grassroots organizations that address the needs of distressed communities.
This report summarizes key findings from a survey conducted for ACF by Branch Associates, Inc. to provide information about the extent to which Targeted Capacity Building program grantees who received funding in the program's first three years (FY 2003, 2004, and 2005) succeeded in utilizing CCF resources to enhance their organizational and service delivery capacity.
Overview of the Study Design
The survey was conducted among a sample of 337 mini-grantees. This sample includes organizations awarded a mini-grant in one of the four priority areas1 in the FY 2003, FY 2004, and FY 2005 grant cycles. The number of awards made under the mini-grant program increased from 52 in FY 2003 to 102 in FY 2004 and to 310 in FY 2005. All FY 2003 and FY 2004 grantees were included in this study. A sample of 191 grantees was selected from among the FY 2005 cohort of 310 grantees2. Exhibit 1 shows the distribution of grantees included in the study from each fiscal year.3 The survey was distributed and returned by mail. Researchers attempted to contact non-respondents by telephone and email to get a completed survey from as many sample members as possible. This data collection methodology resulted in 292 completed surveys for a response rate of 87%.
The
survey was conducted from June through September 2007, which was approximately
two to four years after the award of the CCF grant to the grassroots organizations,
depending on the year they were funded.
The study results are based on self-reported information provided by FBCOs, without independent validation. Respondents reported on accomplishments achieved over follow-up periods ranging from two to four years. It is important to note that the study does not include any type of comparison or control group, which precludes the conclusive attribution of results or changes to the assistance provided through the CCF program.
Profile of Survey Respondents
Among the 292 FBCOs completing the survey, 112 (38%) of the organizations indicated they were faith-based and 180 (62%) indicated they were secular organizations.4 The FBCOs that responded to the survey are diverse in terms of the services they provide, their size, and length of time they have been operating.
The most commonly reported areas of programming are services to at-risk children and youth (62%), education and training (43%), homelessness/housing assistance (37%), marriage education services (28%), and health services (20%). Responding FBCOs also address other at-risk and hard-to-serve populations including the elderly, those living in rural communities, immigrants, and individuals with drug or alcohol addictions.
In general, respondents had considerable service experience. The median "age" of the organizations at the time of the survey was 14 years. Over one-third of the organizations had been providing services for more than 20 years, while 14 percent had started operations within the 5 year period before the survey. The distribution by organizational age was similar regardless of whether the organization was faith-based or secular and regardless of which year an organization received the mini-grant funding.
Variation in organizational expenditures illustrates that the $50,000 mini-grant represents a very large share of the organizational budget for some grantees and a more modest share for others. The survey revealed that 46 percent of the responding grantees had annual expenditures that exceeded $500,000 in the last completed fiscal year before the survey, with 11 percent reporting expenditures of $5,000,000 or more. At the other end of the spectrum, 24 percent reported expenditures between $50,000 and $200,000 and 6 percent reported expenditures of less than $50,000.
There were some notable differences between faith-based and secular organizations' reported expenditures. About one-third of each group reported annual expenditures of less than $200,000 in the fiscal year before the survey. However, 38 percent of secular organizations reported expenditures of $1 million or more compared to only 22 percent of faith-based organizations.
Organizational expenditures also varied across organizations when grouped according to the year in which they received the mini-grant. Significantly more of the organizations awarded mini-grants in 2003 (54%) reported expenditures in the year prior to the survey of $1 million or more. This compares to forty percent of 2004 grantees and only twenty-two percent of 2005 grantees. Similarly, only 10 percent of the 2003 grantees reported annual expenditures of less than $200,000, while 39 percent of 2005 grantees reported expenditures in this range.
There was also variation in reported staffing configurations. At the time of the survey, 9 percent of the organizations reported they had no full-time paid staff members; 45 percent reported having 1-5 full-time paid staff, and 10 percent reported having more than 50 full-time paid staff members. The percentages reported for faith-based and secular organizations were generally similar to those reported for the full sample except that only 5 percent of faith-based organizations reported having more than 50 full-time staff while 13 percent of secular organizations reported having this number of full-time staff.
The survey asked about the receipt of capacity building assistance in addition to the mini-grant. Nearly two-thirds (64%) of the organizations reported that they had received some other capacity building assistance between 2003 and 2006. This percentage was about the same for both faith-based and secular organizations and for the 2003, 2004, and 2005 grantees. Among the organizations that received any other capacity building assistance, nearly three quarters reported receiving financial assistance (72%) and/or training (70%) and about half (49%) reported receiving customized one-on-one technical assistance. Roughly one-quarter of the sample (24%) reported that this additional assistance had been provided by a CCF-funded intermediary.
Overview of Capacity Improvement Findings
The
study was designed to gather information about the extent to which FBCOs
reported that the CCF mini-grant was beneficial in five critical focus
areas of the grant program: leadership development, organizational development,
programs/services, funds development and community engagement. A set of
summary questions provides an overview of FBCOs' perceptions of the extent
to which this CCF support "made a positive difference" in these areas.
As can be seen in Exhibit 2, FBCOs were particularly positive about the extent to which the mini-grant helped improve their organization's overall organizational development, with 92 percent reporting they benefited somewhat or to a great extent.7 FBCOs were also positive about improvements in the level or quality of services and new community linkages and partnerships. As shown, 87 percent of FBCOs reported that the mini-grant contributed "somewhat" or "to a great extent" to improvements in both of these areas. A smaller but substantial proportion of FBCOs reported that the grant helped to support improvements in both leadership development and revenue development strategy (74% and 72% respectively). More detailed information about changes in important developmental areas is presented below.
Description of Exhibit 2: This is a bar graph with six bars. The vertical axis lists the six areas of organizational capacity and the horizontal axis is percentage figures. The bars represent the percentage of responding grantees that reported that the CCF Targeted Capacity Building Grant made a difference to "a great extent" or "somewhat" to their organization in each area of organizational areas. The bar is divided by these two categories with the total reporting either category shown on the far right.
The information represented by the graph is:
For the Areas of Organizational Capacity: Organizational Development had 65% reporting to a great extent and 27% reporting somewhat for a total of 92%. Community Linkages or Partnerships had 54% reporting to a great extent and 33% reporting somewhat for a total of 87%. Level or Quality of Services had 56% reporting to a great extent and 31% reporting somewhat for a total of 87%. Outcomes for Participants had 42% reporting to a great extent and 39% reporting somewhat for a total of 81%. Leadership Development had 40% reporting to a great extent and 34% reporting somewhat for a total of 74%. Revenue Development Strategy had 39% reporting to a great extent and 33% reporting somewhat for a total of 72%
Strengthening FBCOs' Organizational Capacity
Survey respondents reported that they used the mini-grant funds to strengthen multiple areas of organizational capacity including community linkages and to diversify funding, as shown in Exhibit 3.
Description of Exhibit 3: This is a bar graph. There are eight horizontal bars. The vertical axis lists areas of organizational capacity. The horizontal axis is the percent of organizations citing use of the grant for the specific organizational capacity building area; the graphic includes a note at the bottom that states "multiple responses allowed."
The information represented by the graph is:
82% of the survey respondents used mini-grants to strengthen the organizational capacity of Community Linkages. 64% of the survey respondents used mini-grants to strengthen the organizational capacity of Diversify Funding. 64% of the survey respondents used mini-grants to strengthen the organizational capacity of Facilities and Equipment. 62% of the survey respondents used mini-grants to strengthen the organizational capacity of Access to Technology. 61% of the survey respondents used mini-grants to strengthen the organizational capacity of Long-Term Planning. 51% of the survey respondents used mini-grants to strengthen the organizational capacity of Outcome Tracking. 46% of the survey respondents used mini-grants to strengthen the organizational capacity of Financial Management. 45% of the survey respondents used mini-grants to strengthen the organizational capacity of Governance.
Community Linkages. Eight out of ten organizations reported using the mini-grant to expand awareness of their organization and/or develop community linkages. Methods reported for increasing awareness included making presentations to faith-based and community groups, creating or updating their website, and developing written materials such as a brochure or newsletter. FBCOs also reported developing new partnership arrangements with other organizations.
Faith-based and secular organizations were equally likely to use CCF funds to help them expand organizational awareness and develop community linkages. Organizations that were funded more recently were more likely to report activity in this area than earlier grantees - 87 percent of 2005 grantees and 80 percent of 2004 grantees, but only 68 percent of 2003 grantees, reported using funds to create greater awareness and community linkages.
Diversify Funding. Overall, 64 percent of FBCOs responding to the survey reported using mini-grant funds to increase their ability to seek or diversify funding sources. FBCOs were asked about their experience in applying for and receiving funding from various sources both before and after their receipt of the CCF Targeted Capacity Building grant. These questions were designed to gauge changes in FBCOs' pursuit of funding from federal, state, and local government agencies as well as from foundations and other federated giving groups such as the United Way.
As a group, FBCOs reported increased rates of application to each of the funding sources after receipt of the CCF grant. Fifty-one percent of FBCOs reported that they had submitted applications to federal agencies prior to receipt of a mini-grant. Seventy-five percent reported submitting applications to federal agencies after receipt of a mini-grant. This represents a 47 percent increase in the number of organizations applying for funding from federal agencies.
There was an 18 percent increase in FBCOs submitting applications to state/local government agencies, a 9 percent increase in applications submitted to foundations, and a 6 percent increase in applications to federated giving groups. FBCOs also reported increased success in obtaining funding from these sources as well after receipt of a mini-grant. FBCOs reported a 30 percent increase in obtaining funding from federal government agencies and a 16 percent increase in obtaining funding from state/local government agencies. The rate of increase in receipt of funding from federated giving groups and foundations was 18 percent and 4 percent, respectively.
Exhibit 4 shows that both faith-based and secular organizations reported increases in applying for and obtaining funds from all of the funding sources, but within these overall trends there were some differences between the two types of organizations. Both groups reported the greatest increase in applications submitted to the federal government, though the 97 percent increase among faith-based organizations exceeded the 27 percent increase for secular organizations. Both faith-based and secular organizations reported a 28 percent increase in obtaining funds from federal sources.
| Exhibit 4: Change in Proportion of FBCOs Applying for and Receiving Funding - By Faith-Based or Secular Organization | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FBCOs Applying for Funding (Percent change: prior to and since receipt of mini-grant) | FBCOs Obtaining Funding (Percent change: prior to and since receipt of mini-grant) | |||
| Source | Faith-Based | Secular | Faith-Based | Secular |
| Federal Government | +97% | +27% | +28% | +28% |
| State and local government | +43% | +6% | +27% | +11% |
| Foundations | +14% | +5% | +7% | +1% |
| Federated giving groups | +10% | +3% | +25% | +16% |
Respondents funded in later grant years had less time to apply for and obtain funding from each funding source before completing the survey than those funded in earlier years. For this reason, we hypothesized that 2005 grantees might report less activity or success than the 2003 and 2004 grantees. This was not the case in all categories.
As seen in Exhibit 5, 2004 grantees had the highest rate of increase in applying for funding to all sources, with the percentage of grantees that reported submitting applications to federal and state/local governments increasing by 73 percent and 20 percent, respectively. The 2005 grantee cohort reported the highest increase in obtaining government funding (47 percent from federal and 23 percent from state/local government agencies). This finding may partly be due to the lower percentage of 2005 grant recipients who had previously obtained government funding. Prior to receipt of the CCF grant, only 32 percent of the 2005 grantees had received federal funds and 57 percent had received state and local government funds, while 68 percent of 2003 grantees had previously received federal funds, and 82 percent had previously received state and local funds. This suggests there was more room for growth or improvement in these areas for the 2005 grantees.
| Exhibit 5: Change in Proportion of FBCOs Applying for
and Receiving Funding - By Grant Year |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FBCOs Applying for Funding (Percent change: prior to and since receipt of mini-grant) | FBCOs Obtaining Funding (Percent change: prior to and since receipt of mini-grant) | |||||
| Source | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 |
| Federal Government | +26% | +73% | +45% | +10% | +19% | +47% |
| State and local government | +15% | +20% | +15% | +6% | +9% | +23% |
| Foundations | +12% | +12% | +6% | +16% | +8% | -3%8 |
| Federated giving groups | +3% | +14% | +2% | +14% | +31% | +15% |
Access to Technology & Facilities and Equipment. Sixty-two percent of the FBCOs reported using the mini-grant funds for at least one technological upgrade, with the purchase of new computers and related hardware and software at the top of the list. In addition, almost two-thirds of the FBCOs (64%) reported using a portion of the mini-grant for facility or equipment improvements.
Financial Management Systems. Forty-six percent of FBCOs reported improvements in their financial management systems. Organizations reported using the CCF mini-grant in the following ways to better manage their finances: developing systems for recording financial transactions and generating regular budgets, developing systems for tracking income and expenses, instituting internal controls, using new financial software (e.g., Quickbooks), and adopting a computerized bookkeeping system.
Long-Term Planning. Approximately six out of ten organizations (61%) reported that they used mini-grant funds to improve their ability to do effective long-term planning. The most commonly cited activities for which funds were used in this area included creation or revision of a written strategic plan, collection of information from constituents to inform strategic decisions, preparation of a work plan for implementing long-range annual goals, and development or refinement of a mission statement.
Outcome Tracking. Just over half the organizations (51%) reported using funds to develop systems for tracking outcomes. Organizations reported using CCF funding to improve collection of basic information about program clients, identify key outcomes, and collect outcome data on an ongoing basis.
Governance. Forty-five percent of responding FBCOs reported that CCF funds were used to improve their internal governance. Specific actions that organizations reported included defining board members' roles and responsibilities, recruiting new board members, and establishing board committees.
The percentage of faith-based and secular organizations reporting the use of the mini-grant funds in each of these areas was similar. There was some variation by the year of grant award, however. Organizations that received their grant in 2003 reported fewer areas in which they used the funds than did later grantees.
Strengthening FBCOs' Level of Services
The aim of CCF funding is to help organizations improve their infrastructure and bolster their sustainability, ultimately enabling them to serve more people more effectively. This survey provides insight into the extent to which CCF mini-grant support enabled FBCOs to serve more clients, hire more staff, and start a new program.
As shown in Exhibit 6, two-thirds of all respondents combined and of faith-based and secular organizations indicated that CCF support enabled them to serve more clients. The median number of additional clients served was 50 for organizations that reported starting new programs and 67 for program expansions. Eighty-six percent of all organizations reported that they have been able to sustain the increase in numbers served after the mini-grant funds were exhausted.
Slightly more than half of the respondents reported that CCF funds enabled them to start a new program (53%) or hire more staff (54%). By and large, the organizations that reported expanding their capacity - whether through hiring additional staff or starting new programs - reported that they have been able to sustain that expansion since the CCF funding ended. Nearly 90 percent of organizations that started new programs reported that they have been able to sustain them. Somewhat fewer, 70 percent, of the organizations reported that they have been able to sustain increased staffing levels. At least two-thirds of the organizations with new programs stated that they have been able to sustain them by obtaining new funding, and 35 percent reported that they sustained new programs through new partnerships.
Reports of strengthening the level of services did not vary between faith-based and secular organizations or by funding year. However, ability to sustain increases in service capacity and how that increased capacity was sustained did vary somewhat. To sustain increased numbers of clients served, secular organizations were more likely than faith-based organizations to report they obtained new funding (68% compared with 48%). In contrast, faith-based organizations were more likely to report using volunteers in place of paid staff to sustain new programs and increased numbers of clients.
How programs and services for additional clients were sustained did not vary by grant year, but a higher percentage of recent grantees reported the ability to sustain these increased service levels. Among 2003 grantees, 71 percent sustained new programs and 76 percent sustained services to the increased numbers of clients, while 90 percent or more of 2005 grantees reported they were able to sustain both new programs and increased numbers of clients.
Description of Exhibit 6: This is a bar graph. There are three bars. The vertical axis lists three areas of service delivery capacity: 1) Serve more clients; 2) Hire more staff; and 3) Start a new program. The horizontal axis is the percentage reporting "yes." That is, the percentage reporting that the grant enabled the organization serve more clients, hire more staff, or start a new program. In addition to the total percentage shown in the bar graph, the exhibit presents the percent of Faith-based and percent of Secular organizations reporting "yes" for each of the areas.
The information represented by the graph is:
The influence of a CCF Targeted Capacity Building Grant on Service Delivery Capacity enabled 66% of Faith-based and 67% of Secular FBCO's (66% total) to serve more clients. It enabled 57% of Faith-based and 53% of Secular FBCO's (54% total) to hire more staff. It enabled 49% of Faith-based and 56% of Secular FBCO's (53% total) to start a new program.
Conclusion
Although the amount of the funds FBCOs received through the CCF Targeted Capacity Building program was modest, it allowed grantees to strengthen their capacity in a wide range of areas. Both faith-based and secular organizations that received grants in each of the first three years of the Targeted Capacity Building program reported positive improvements and attributed numerous benefits to receipt of these funds.
These accomplishments, while noteworthy, are interim milestones. The ultimate objective of the CCF program is to help grassroots organizations develop the capacity to provide more effective services to more individuals and families on a long-term basis. Taken together, these findings portray a group of organizations that report strengthened organizational capacity that can be expected to help them continue to pursue and achieve this goal.