white paper on performance management for community ... - FACA

More documents

Recommendations

Info

NASCSP 2013 Option Two: Current Service Categories with New Subcategories Another option would be to maintain the current reporting structure for CSBG Expenditures, but break out a few of the more ambiguous categories into new descriptive subcategories. Linkages, Self-sufficiency, and Emergency Services could be subdivided to clarify funds that are used for disaster relief, partnerships, case management, etc. The strengths of this approach would be the connection to the categories that are clearly listed in the CSBG Statute (Sec. 676 b.1.A.) and the comparison ability at the main category level to analyze data across multiple years. It also provides more details on the use of CSBG funds for management and oversight. Page 40
NASCSP 2013 Option Three: Direct Services vs. Organizational Capacity Building Another way to present the use of CSBG funds would be to create two new levels of categorization for CSBG expenditures: the use of funds for provision of services and the use of funds for organization capacity building. The organizational capacity building funds could be expenditures related to improving the ability of the agency to meet or maintain organizational standards. The funds for provision of services would look similar to the current service categories and the additional second group of categories would describe some of the activities in the ROMA cycle or organizational standards such as funds used for community needs assessments and data collection system improvements. The challenges associated with this approach would be related to the cost and timeframe of implementation. This would require new reporting elements that local agency data systems may not be tracking and would also require a training and technical assistance approach that ensures data accuracy. This approach would not be comparable to previous years’ data reports, but may prove more valuable in management and oversight of the CSBG funds. In addition, it provides a way to look at connecting the CSBG funds to the Organizational Standards and can show how local agencies are investing in building their capacity Page 41
Page 1 and 2: WHITE PAPER ON PERFORMANCE MANAGEME
Page 3 and 4: NASCSP 2013 BACKGROUND The Economic
Page 5 and 6: NASCSP 2013 Revisiting the current
Page 7 and 8: NASCSP 2013 3. When will you achiev
Page 9 and 10: NASCSP 2013 scientific research, su
Page 11 and 12: UNDERSTANDING COMMUNITY ACTION’S
Page 13 and 14: NASCSP 2013 simply reporting outcom
Page 15 and 16: NASCSP 2013 Outcomes vs. outputs Pr
Page 17 and 18: NASCSP 2013 disabilities, and child
Page 19 and 20: NASCSP 2013 UNDERSTANDING THE NATIO
Page 21 and 22: NASCSP 2013 The graph shows the lar
Page 23 and 24: NASCSP 2013 3. The ability to meet
Page 25 and 26: NASCSP 2013 supportive environments
Page 27 and 28: NASCSP 2013 that old age does not b
Page 29 and 30: NASCSP 2013 Housing & Ut
Page 31 and 32: NASCSP 2013 CHALLENGES: This approa
Page 33 and 34: NASCSP 2013 CHALLENGES: Many of the
Page 35 and 36: NASCSP 2013 the four agencies’ sp
Page 37 and 38: NASCSP 2013 Percentage of low-incom
Page 39: NASCSP 2013 Option One: Current CSB
Page 43 and 44: NASCSP 2013 CONCLUSION The Communit
Page 45 and 46: Community Action Partnership and th
Page 47 and 48: Family Self-sufficiency Revitalized
Page 49 and 50: Age of CAA Participants
Page 51 and 52: NPI Description Goal 1: Low-income
Page 53 and 54: 4.1 E # Federal Government 4.1 F #

white paper on performance management for community ... - FACA

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?