How do I turn a mountain of grantee reports into insight for my board?

Where do we start when every grantee report looks different?

When every grantee report looks different, start with your board's questions, then make an inventory of what each report can tell you about them. A simple grid helps: grantees down one side, the board's questions across the top, and in each cell what that report says, with a note on what kind of evidence it is (a count, a survey result, participant comments, a staff observation). The completed grid identifies which questions most reports can answer, which only a few can address, and where the information is missing entirely.

Expect the grid to be uneven, because reports written to different templates, at different times, and for different purposes won't line up neatly. An uneven grid still tells you a great deal about the portfolio, and it also helps you determine what to ask grantees for next time. Should all our grantees report on the same outcomes? covers that decision.

How do we combine reports that measure different things?

You combine reports that measure different things by combining what they find, and by keeping the numbers themselves apart unless they were measured the same way. Numbers measured in different ways, with different definitions or over different periods, can't be added or averaged without producing a figure that misrepresents every organization included in it. Instead, identify the themes that appear across reports, such as a common barrier participants face or a type of support several grantees found effective, and note how many grantees report each one and what evidence they offer.

Where several grantees measured the same outcome in similar ways, you can bring those results together, as long as you're explicit about which organizations they represent. Numbers and participants' own descriptions of their experiences tell different parts of the story. A result that shows up in several grantees' data is stronger when their participants' comments help explain it, and a theme in participants' comments is easier to act on when the numbers show how widespread it is.

What does the board need to see about the portfolio?

The board needs to see what the portfolio is accomplishing, where results vary, and what the foundation or network will do with what it has learned. In practice, that's usually a short account built around the board's questions:

• What's happening across the portfolio, in a few themes, with the evidence for each.
• Where results differ, and what seems to explain the difference: who is served, how the work is carried out, or local conditions.
• What the evidence supports and what it doesn't, so the board doesn't read more into the results than they can carry.
• What comes next, such as support grantees have asked for, a question worth looking into, or a change in what you ask grantees to report.

A board that responds mostly to numbers may need the same account told differently. How do I explain our results to a board that just wants numbers? covers that audience.

How do we involve grantees without asking them for more?

You involve grantees without asking them for more by working from what they've already reported and asking them only to check what you've concluded. Before the account goes to your board, share the themes with grantees, in a short meeting or a written summary, and ask whether the interpretation fits their experience and what it misses. That step often corrects a misinterpretation before it reaches your board, and it demonstrates to grantees that their reports are being read and used.

Then send the finished synthesis back to them, because grantees rarely have an opportunity to see patterns across a portfolio or to learn how their work relates to that of other organizations doing similar work. How do I ask grantees for data without overwhelming them? covers keeping future reporting manageable.