Examples

• Feedback from primary constituents
• Feedback from grantees/investees
• Feedback from other constituents
   

Feedback from primary constituents

1. Comparative Constituency Feedback for Children and Family Service Agencies in the US. 2007-pressent
   In November 2007 Keystone and the Alliance for Children and Families (ACF) and United Neighborhood Centers of America (UNCA) launched a project to research how feedback could be used by American child and family service organizations.
   
   The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation provided funding.
   
   The research project led to a white paper entitled “The 21st century potential of constituency voice”. It found that everyone was collecting feedback, but organizations were not using it. Clear recommendations could transform the value of feedback. Funding is being sought to implement them.
    
2. Youth Truth. 2008 - present
   Keystone acted as an advisor to a project undertaken by the Center for Effective Philanthropy and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. It is surveying students from a number of high schools currently receiving funding from the Foundation.
   
   The aim is to learn how schools can do a better job of preparing students for life after graduation - by using feedback from students. Results will be compared across schools and school administrators will use them to shape improvement efforts.
   Find out more.

Feedback from grantees/investees

1. Comparative Grantee Feedback for Grantmakers in East Africa. 2007-2009
   With support from the Ford Foundation, Keystone generated systematic, comparative feedback data from grantees of 8 East African grantmakers about their experience of the grantmaking relationship and their perception of the grantmaker’s performance.
   
   Keystone used a common, standardized questionnaire to gather anonymous feedback from the grantees. Questions covered performance-related issues in six areas, including the application process, M&E requirements, non-financial support and others.
   
   Each foundation was presented with an individual report showing how they were rated by their grantees. Their performance was directly compared to all the other grantmakers’  performance.
   
   The general public report of the survey provides a snapshot of the state of East African Grantmaking from the perspective of grantees. Download it here.
   
   Download an anonymous sample of an individual grantmaker’s feedback report here.
    
2. Client survey for the Grassroots Business Fund. Mar-Apr 2009
   In 2009, Keystone worked with the Grassroots Business Fund (GBF) to conduct an independent and anonymous survey of its invetees.
   Questions focused on how investees experienced the relationship with GBF across six performance areas:
   
   - General perceptions
   - Application and due diligence process
   - The quantity and quality of financial support
   - The value of non-financial and technical support
   - Quality of interactions and communications
   - The value of GBF’s emerging Impact Planning, Assessment and Learning System.
   
   Additional questions on investees’ current communications practices and needs will be used to help design a capacity-building intervention.
   
   The survey was followed up with telephonic interviews. Summary findings were presented at GBF’s ‘Metrics from the Ground Up’ workshop held in May 2009.
    
3. Comparative Grantee Feedback for Community grantmakers in Southern Africa. 2008-present
   This action learning project, funded by the Ford Foundation, works with a cohort of national and international wholesale and retail community grantmakers in different countries to understand how grantmakers currently manage their relationships with grantees, as well as to assess their own performance and the impact of their work as grantmakers.

Feedback from other constituents

1. Feedback survey for transnational social change networks. May 2009- April 2010
   In partnership with iScale and with support from the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Keystone has completed a project for getting constituency feedback for 9 transnational social change networks.
   
   A common questionnaire interrogating the core value proposition of networks has been developed and delivered to the members of all 9 networks.
   
   Individual reports have been prepared for each network, with a confidential analysis of how they compare to the whole group. The project aims to increase networks' understanding of their relationships with their constituents and identify areas for learning and improvement.
   
   Download a sample comparative survey report (anonymised version of one network’s confidential report).
   
   As part of the project, Keystone and iScale have also produced a step-by step guide and an overall survey report, with anonymous comparisons of the findings across the 9 networks. Download the overall report and the annex. 
   
   Networks are reporting the survey results along with their responses to the feedback received back to their constituents.
   
   See for example the report back summary published by Aflatoun.
   
   Keystone conducted a client satisfaction survey with the networks to learn about their experience of participating in the project. The results of this can be downloaded here.
    
2. The Global Network for Disaster Risk Reduction ‘Views from the Frontline’ Project. June 2008 - June 2009
   Keystone is collaborating with the Global Network in the "Views from the Frontline" project - the largest independent, global assessment of disaster reduction at the local level ever undertaken.
   
   We have developed a methodology that enables people in at-risk areas to assess the progress made at the local level towards the implementation of disaster risk reduction, preparedness and response measures.
   
   Common questionnaires were administered by civil society organizations in more than 40 countries, yielding 7000 responses.
   
   National and regional reports, as well as a global report, were presented at the UN-ISDR Global Platform in June 2009. This view from the grassroots was contrasted with information from official government sources.