Chair: Aaron Turpin, University of Toronto
Does impact measurement help or hinder social innovation? Reflections on 10 years of social impact measurement practice
Bryn Sadownik, Vancity Community Foundation; Garth Yule, Junxion Strategy
This paper reflects on the past 10 years of effort by funders and investors, as well as government and other stakeholders, to improve impact measurement in the non-profit sector, with an eye to understanding how evolving methods and initiatives may support or hinder social innovation. This includes the development and application of methods such as Social Return on Investment, as well as community-based initiatives such as Demonstrating Value, and more recently the Common Approach to Impact Measurement and TIESS’s Evaluation and Impact Measurement in the Social Economy.
The expanding civic footprint of non-profit community sport
Micheal L. Shier, University of Toronto; Katie Misener, University of Waterloo; Patti Millar, University of Windsor; Kathy Babiak, University of Michigan
Community sport organizations are an important pillar of the nonprofit sector and are expanding their "civic footprint" beyond sport service delivery and contributing to their communities in new, socially responsible ways. This paper presents results from a multiple methods study which outlines the key dimensions of social impact capacity as well as a new scale to measure the extent to which various dimensions of social impact capacity predict an organization’s engagement in specific types of social impact initiatives. The results will aid grassroots nonprofits in building capacity and focusing their social impact agenda.
Influences on Nonprofit Chief Executive Compensation: An Examination of Penalties and Privileges
Chris Fredette, University of Windsor; Ruth Bernstein, University of Washington Tacoma
We explore six blocks of predictors examining performance-based merit (i) CEO gender and ethno-racial identity, (ii) employment characteristics, (iii) Board Chair and Treasurer gender and ethno-racial identity, and Board compositional variety in gender, race, and age, (iv) organizational characteristics, (v) strategic performance and financial performance, and (vi) a test of competing diversity, social, organizational, and merit-based hypotheses in order to further the understanding of the determinants of nonprofit CEO compensation. Findings highlight the significance of board diversity, organizational size and scope, and positive strategic change, while discounting traditional financial measures and the demographic diversity of the CEO.