(1) Litigation as “storyboard.”
Litigation in 2017-2020 (which, among other things, challenged harsh enforcement such as the Muslim Ban and “public charge”) protected vulnerable communities. It also was used by advocates as an effective “hook” to shape narrative, support organizing, and encourage policymakers to act. Organizers helped ensure that media reported on courtroom hearings and judges’ rulings, and that outlets consulted community members and allies when doing so. Advocates used rulings to seek action from legislators as well as statements of support from influential institutions and the public. Courtroom hearings provided physical and virtual rallying points for affected community members.
As the 2017-2020 period proceeded, signing on to amicus curiae briefs to appellate courts provided community organizations that themselves do not litigate with opportunities to use litigation to further their advocacy goals. (In an upcoming post I’ll discuss this feature of amicus work, and how it can be measured.)
Selected measurement and learning resources and approaches:
TCC Group, supported by the Atlantic Philanthropies’ Atlas Learning Project, created a series of monographs called Legal Advocacy as a Strategy: An Undertaking of the Atlas Learning Project. The 2016 series covers litigation strategy, funding, and measurement. It’s an excellent resource for any funder of legal advocacy.
My brief guide to evaluation of impact litigation, “Measurement & Evaluation of Impact Litigation: Two Approaches” (2019) is available on the Resources Page of my website. It is a helpful companion to deeper resources on impact litigation because it discusses evaluation of litigation tactics in addition to litigation strategies. The tactical analysis can, among other things, inform the durability of a litigation program.
(2) Supporting communities in a period when chaos is a feature, not a bug.
The Muslim Ban and Family Separations are two examples of federal government enforcement campaigns that were chaotic, at least initially, in 2017-2020. Whether chaos was a strategy or result of inept planning seems irrelevant, since chaos effectively promoted the administration’s stated goal of instilling fear.
Starting in late 2016, a number of immigrant and BIPOC organizations developed proactive defense projects in anticipation of being targeted. I reviewed two types of such projects (although I’m sure there were others): programs developed by a community organization for its existing members, and train-the-trainer projects, where an expert organization trained leaders who then developed programs in their own communities. Both types of programs helped directly impacted residents work through what to do and not to do in enforcement situations and provided in-language informational materials.
Organizers I interviewed said that projects increased knowledge and addressed fear, and enhanced community power through building residents’ sense of agency. Organizing made rapid response more effective when enforcement actions in fact happened in some locations. These programs also enhanced groups’ recognition and influence in their communities through giving faith groups, businesses, and other allies a meaningful and thoughtfully designed effort to connect to.
Selected measurement and learning resources and approaches:
Community organizing can be analyzed both in terms of “what changed in communities’ and allies’ behavior and in policies that affect them” (advocacy outcome analysis) and “how did organizers’ efforts build individual and community power” (power-building analysis).
On power-building: Advocacy that Builds Power: Transforming Policy and Systems for Health and Racial Equity by Julia Coffman, Gigi Barsoum, PhD, Albertina Lopez, PhD, and Mariah Brothe Gantz (2021) is a seminal resource on power building as a “result” and how powerbuilding differs from traditional advocacy “wins.”
In 2023 I published a helpful list of “what to look for” in evaluating powerbuilding initiatives. See Power Building Tactics & Outcomes Charts.
On advocacy outcomes: See paragraph (5) below.
(3) Operational security planning as a front-line essential.
Media outlets were at times given an early heads-up for immigration raids in 2017-2020, learning about enforcement actions in remote areas as legal and other “first responders” were still heading to the affected community. This in turn appears to have given anti-immigrant and anti-BIPOC groups an early opportunity to be a “force multiplier” of harsh enforcement, including by issuing threats against first responders and supporters.
One first responder I interviewed faced many operational security challenges on the ground, including a lack of secure Wi-Fi in a small town where the sole hotel was occupied by ICE agents and media. They also reported very specific on-line harassment and threats directed at staff and staff’s family members. This group was fortunate to receive “rapid response” funding in a timely manner to hire security consultants to remove staff information from the Web and plug other security holes.
Selected measurement and learning resources and approaches:
The Ford Foundation’s BUILD Initiative produced a comprehensive Cybersecurity Assessment Tool that is designed for non-technical experts in philanthropy and the nonprofit sectors.
I have done limited evaluation of operational security services for grantees (and one philanthropy) in the course of larger evaluations. This much-less-sophisticated assessment used a “process evaluation” approach that looked at completion (did the security firm complete the anticipated review or upgrade work as anticipated), participation (did the organization receiving the services participate effectively in the work), quality (did the recipient of services perceive them to be of high quality) and satisfaction (was the recipient satisfied with the outcome of the work).
Participation in security assessments and upgrades was the greatest sticking point for the grantees I interviewed. Organizations were grateful to receive security-assessment and upgrade services from the sponsoring foundation’s consultant firm. But they were under such enormous daily pressures that they struggled to timely complete all the recommended security-enhancement steps.
(4) A rising tide lifts, but not always gently.
During the 2017-2020 period (and since) I have interacted with nonprofits that received an unprecedented surge of foundation and individual funding to defend communities under threat. Although the funding was welcomed, deploying it was rocky in an environment of terrific urgency and high expectations. Human resources struggled to meet hiring demands; other back-office staff wrestled with insufficient processes and technologies; newer middle-managers were challenged to build supervision skills while working in the emergency response trenches themselves.
In one situation I saw that failing to address the challenges early — while the wave was cresting, long before it topped out – was self-defeating. Highly skilled managers didn’t have to work where hiring junior staff took months, and where senior management was challenged to make important program decisions. They sought opportunity elsewhere, hindering the organization’s progress toward its goals.
Selected measurement and learning resources and approaches:
The Ford Foundation’s BUILD initiative produced a comprehensive and comprehensible Organizational Mapping Tool for use by nonprofits in identifying their organizational strengthening needs, which of course can change as an organization experiences rapid growth. I have used it to develop outcomes and indicators for specific areas of organizational strengthening.
Together with a colleague well-versed in nonprofit management, in 2021 I did scoping work for measurement and learning project for a major nonprofit’s operations functions. We developed a set of outcomes and indicators to assess progress toward outcomes for areas including human resources, resource development, and financial management. I’ll be writing more about this in an upcoming post.
(5) Measure, learn, rinse, repeat.
Every service or advocacy activity produces two valuable “products”: Help or support to impacted populations, and information about “what can work” in a particular advocacy environment. To consistently improve performance, it’s important to gather and analyze these “information products” and relay that information to decision-makers.
There is a great deal of literature on evaluating advocacy. Please contact me if you want to know more. Here are two initial, low-barrier resources:
Five Action Questions. In 2017-2019 I was evaluating the work of a philanthropy client that was separately holding monthly meetings with its technical assistance consultants. In reviewing notes from these meetings I noted that their focus was more on “what happened” than on the highly regarded team’s impact on the field (which was substantial).
In consultation with my expert evaluator friend Bonnie Shepard I developed a straightforward set of impact-focused questions that the client used as a monthly discussion guide. See “New to Measurement and Learning for Social Change? Start with this Simple Tool” (2023) available on my Resources page.
The result for this client was actionable impact-focused discussion that did not add time or effort to its consultant check-ins. I’ve found this result with subsequent clients, too.
Major campaign milestones: For specific stand-out moments of a campaign or project I have utilized the “Intense Period Debrief” rubric by Julia Coffman and Ehren Reed in Unique Methods in Advocacy Evaluation (2010).
It’s helpful for programs to have evaluator support to make the most of these advocacy-outcome-measurement and learning tools. But advocates and organizers can benefit from working with them “off of the shelf” with the instructions provided.
Finally: An Overall Framework for Approaching 2025 and Beyond
Liz Ruedy’s Six Models for Understanding Impact (Democracy Fund, 2018) discusses three overall advocacy impact models that are largely “affirmative” and three others that are “defensive.” It is a simple and elegant rubric for understanding advocacy “impact” outside of the common connotation of “big success.”
ORS Impact dug more deeply into the “defensive” part of this rubric in their excellent 2019 monograph When the Best Offense is a Good Defense: Understanding and Measuring Advocacy on the Defense. I used this and Liz Ruedy’s paper extensively in the latter part of the first Trump Administration. I will be recommending them to my clients in the coming months.
