San Luis Obispo Non-Profit Support Center Feasibility Study - 1998-99; Analysis of Survey Data: Organization Needs and Methods Section

San Luis Obispo
Non-Profit Support Center Feasibility Study
1998-99

Cuesta College Institute of Professional Development

Study underwritten by PG&E Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Los Padres Customer Operations

Analysis of Survey Data (continued)

Organization Needs and Methods Section

Identification of Organizational Needs
Agencies were asked to rate the importance of 21 organizational needs. The top five needs identified by those who gave a numerical rating were fundraising, grant writing, resource development, marketing and board development. Exhibit 8 is organized by those who rated their selections of organizational needs. However, some agencies did not give a numerical rating and just checked off the needs that were important to them. The percentages in Exhibit 8 include all responses whether or not the item was rated. When all the responses were included, the percentages showed a slight difference from the rated items. Most notable was the volunteer recruitment which moved to a number one slot and computer assistance which tied with board development.

Exhibit 8: Organizational Needs by Average Rating
N=74

Organization Needs	N	Percentage	Average Rating
Fundraising	65	88%	7.06
Grant Writing	67	91%	6.91
Resource Development	64	86%	6.73
Marketing	67	91%	6.25
Board Development	64	86%	6.08
Public Relations Plans	63	85%	5.92
Strategic Planning	63	85%	5.84
Leadership Management	57	77%	5.46
Computer Assistance	64	86%	5.39
Volunteer Recruitment, Mgt & Training	68	92%	5.38
Communication Skills	61	82%	5.18
Team Building	61	82%	5.02
Interagency Collaboration Process	61	82%	4.90
Financial Management	62	84%	4.84
Program Evaluation	61	82%	4.75
Business Planning	57	77%	4.60
Staff Training	62	84%	4.53
Conflict Resolution	59	80%	3.86
Personnel Management	59	80%	3.85
Facilitation Training	56	76%	3.57
Customer Service Training	57	77%	3.18

In a separate question agencies were asked to indicate their top three priorities from the listed 21 needs. The responses to this question were similar to the results in the rating question and verified the importance of these needs to the agencies. The seven needs that were indicated most frequently as top three priorities are listed in rank order with the top priority first:

Grant Writing
Fundraising
Board Development
Resource Development
Volunteer Recruitment
Computer Assistance
Marketing/Public Relations

Analysis
The top seven needs listed above reflected the challenges of non-profit management in a rural area. Grant writing and fundraising have been part of the survival of many agencies. Board and resource development are essential components of a well managed agency. Many agencies demonstrated a need for volunteer support and recruitment as indicated by the scores. In rural communities there seems to be a greater need for computer assistance since there are fewer resources available for these services. Marketing /public relations may have been high because of the need for agencies to gain recognition in the community to increase their chances for more funding and for more volunteer support.

Methods of Receiving Assistance
Agencies were asked to rate the perceived value of 14 methods (See Exhibit 9). Training classes in the community and a consultant who works with agencies individually were rated the highest by respondents who used the one to 10 scale. These were followed by workshops, referral bank and library resources, written materials and consultant who works with group of agencies in ranked order. Even though some agencies did not give a numerical rating and just checked off the methods that were valuable to them the results were quite similar. Workshops, referral bank, training classes, consulting individually and written materials were all in the top five methods. The only differences were in the percentages in Exhibit 9 which were compiled from both the rated responses and the check marks to indicate the frequency with which a method was chosen. Using the percentages, workshops (91%) moved to the top slot followed closely by referral bank and library research (90%). The Community Forum moved to third place (87%) along with training. Federal and state legislation as well as special events were rated last and least chosen.

Exhibit 9: Methods of Assistance by Average Ratings
N=69

Methods of Assistance	N	Percentage	Average Rate
Training classes in community	60	87%	7.53
Consultant who works w/agencies individually	59	86%	7.19
Workshops	63	91%	6.71
Resources / Referral Bank/Library Research	62	90%	6.08
Written materials	58	84%	6.02
Consultant who works w/ group of agencies	56	81%	5.98
Conferences	59	86%	5.85
Community Calendar	56	81%	5.63
Technical Assistance by telephone	57	83%	5.42
Community Forum	60	87%	5.35
Clearinghouse	52	75%	5.25
Computer on-line databases & analysis	56	81%	4.73
Special Events	54	78%	4.70
Federal & State legislation	52	75%	4.50

Analysis
Since several participants filled in the survey at the Collaboration Forum, this may have influenced the importance that was attached to the community forum although the Forum is still felt to be the best known method in the community for providing valuable training.

Top Priorities for Methods of Assistance
In a separate question, agencies were asked to indicate their top three priorities from the 14 listed methods that they would use a Non-profit Support Center for assistance. The results were very similar to the rating question (see Exhibit 9). The top priorities that agencies would use a Non-profit Support Center for assistance were consultation, training classes, workshops, and a resource/referral bank. The only difference in preferences from the rated methods was indicated by placing a community calendar as a high third priority.

Proceed to the Analysis of Survey Data: Non-Profit Support Center Section.

Return to the Feasibility Study Table of Contents.

Cuesta
College
Home Page

Institute for
Professional
Development
Home Page