Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Upcoming SlideShare
What to Upload to SlideShare
What to Upload to SlideShare
Loading in …3
×
1 of 11

2020 WE Member Engagement Survey Results - Summary

0

Share

Download to read offline

2020 we member engagement survey results

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all

Related Audiobooks

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all

2020 WE Member Engagement Survey Results - Summary

  1. 1. 2020 WashEval Membership Survey
  2. 2. Background • WE Board members identified the need to learn more about our members • Inform decisions to better serve members • Thoughtful about timing • All Board members involved • Piloted internally • 207 (53%) respondents of the 389 current members who were sent the survey 2
  3. 3. Demographics Gender (n=182) n % Orientation (n=176) n % Race/Ethnicity (n=191) n % Age (n=177) n % Male 34 19 Asexual 1 1 African American/Black 24 13 18-24 0 0 Female 140 77 Bisexual 7 4 American Indian, Native American, Alaska Native 1 1 25-34 42 24 Queer 2 1 Gay 3 2 Asian 14 7 35-44 57 32 PNR 6 3 Heterosexual 140 80 Caribbean Islander 1 1 45-54 33 19 Lesbian 6 3 European American, White 131 69 55-64 22 12 Pansexual 1 1 Latino or Hispanic 11 6 65-74 13 7 Queer 3 2 Middle Eastern or Arab 2 1 75 or older 5 3 PNR 12 7 PNR 5 3 PNR 5 3 How will the Board use this information? Helps us understand the diversity of our membership and opportunities to ensure inclusivity!
  4. 4. Member Motivation • Majority of members joined WE to: • Learn more about evaluation theories and practice • Make professional connections and contributions • Not all reasons are related to evaluation Board Response  WE is not just a community of evaluators, we build community  Continue to share resources and learning opportunities related to inform evaluation theory and practice  Sponsor activities on diverse topics interesting and beneficial to WE members 4
  5. 5. Programs Board Response • Hold monthly events of varying types • Only 10% interested in “other activities” • Schedule events at preferred times: • On-Demand (SB) • 12-2pm (BB/DD) • 5:30-6pm (Social) 88% 44% 72% 47% Brown Bags Deep Dives Skills-Building Social 5
  6. 6. Communications • Most beneficial parts of Digest: • Member Events • Evaluation Events • Jobs & Opportunities Board Response • M&E training/certificate opportunities desired • No comments on the website – unsure if members use it as a resource • Individual emails about events not necessary Weekly emails are preferred (e.g., WE Weekly Digest) 6
  7. 7. Membership Dues • Most in favor of: • Increase to $30 (82%) • Auto-renew Option (77%) • Two-Year Option (69%) Board Response • Increase after the COVID-19 pandemic • Offer two-year membership option (discounted) • Auto-renew, but only with opt-in option Why do most memberships lapse? Most lapsed members move away from the DC area but love WE programs and resources! 7
  8. 8. Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion • Generally satisfied with mindfulness and incorporation of diversity, equity, and inclusion • Acknowledge diversity of Washington, DC area • WE expected to implement, not to lead DEI Board Response • Created Anti-Racism Task Force • WE Board released statement on anti-racism commitments • Incorporate in programs, communication, community engagement, etc. 8
  9. 9. Volunteer Opportunities Type Yes Maybe Pro Bono 20 40 Mentor 17 30 Volunteer 23 38 Board or Committee Member 17 28 Total 77 136 Board Response • We are so thrilled to see so many interested members • Look out for emails from WE Board or Committee members for more information • Send your general questions to president@washingtonevaluators.org 9
  10. 10. Panel Q&A
  11. 11. Keep the Conversation Going! Board Members (@washingtonevaluators.org) • President@ – Patricia Moore Shaffer • President-Elect@ – Beeta Tahmassebi • Programs@ – Katie Pitts • Communications@ – Katherine Braga • CommunityEngagement@ – Emily Bango • Membership@ – Natalie Donahue 11

Editor's Notes

  • Patricia gives the introduction.
  • Esther provide background for survey and how I got involved as member of the membership committee.
  • Esther provide some information about demographic information and why the Board wanted to collect this information.

    I think we should also provide either a slide or talking points on the Board makeup as well. For the open-ended question about how DEI could be improved within WE, a lot of folks either said they didn’t know, they weren’t aware of the representation of the Board, and to look at our leadership first. So all of that tells me we should provide them with this information at the very least – for each of the same four categories in this slide.
  • Esther provide a recap of the results for why members joined WE. Patricia or Beeta to speak to how the Board will use this information.
  • Esther/Katie

    - Many members were interested in knowing what other members were doing – particularly those outside of their sector. Suggested short “Ted Talks” to showcase what different members were working on. We could organize around themes (advocacy evaluation, international evaluation, participatory eval., etc.)

    - Social event suggestions: Book club, M&E trivia
    - Emerging evaluators: there were a number of suggestions about specifically engaging this segment of the membership. There were quite a few people who wanted to know how to stay current on their knowledge / M&E certificates and training opportunities (which I think we do nicely already with the Weekly Digest
    - Another fun idea: holding a mini AEA conference for WE members – provide opportunity for those to present who did not have their presentations accepted

    - Brown bags and skills-building topics included (in no particular order):
    - Evaluation capacity-building (how to do it effectively)
    - Data visualization
    - Evaluation and IT (information and perhaps training on various systems: Qualtrics, R, data management systems, etc)… maybe we could have some sort of IT fair? Bring vendors “in” for each of those products and have them showcase them for 20 minutes each?
    - Systems approaches to evaluation / complexity aware methods
    - DEI
    - Evaluation theory – and how to put it into practice
    - Federal evaluation / federal legislation (such as the Evidence Act)
    - Starting a business / independent consulting
    - Advocacy evaluation
    - Social network analysis
    - And pretty much any and all methods
  • Natalie/Katherine

    - Note: There were no responses regarding the website at all… I think that’s a finding (i.e. does anyone visit it?!)
    - Emerging evaluators: there were a number of suggestions about specifically engaging this segment of the membership. There were quite a few people who wanted to know how to stay current on their knowledge / M&E certificates and training opportunities (which I think we do nicely already with the Weekly Digest

    - There were multiple requests to utilize asynchronous forums… but given the issues with EvalTalk, I’m not sure WE wants to go this route
  • Natalie/Josh:

    - Will wait to increase dues until after COVID
    - Auto-renew  credit card security, only after reminders, opt-in feature
    - Mention payment for events… only for the holiday party and other “pay to play” type events… ask Josh to present on how dues are used currently

    - Had a lot of really interesting ideas on programming; will work closely with the Programs team to schedule things

    How do we add more minor
  • Natalie/Beeta and Emily

    - Suggestion to highlight diverse makeup of WE – perhaps through Member Spotlights?
  • Natalie/Patricia and Beeta

    - Perhaps we could hold some sort of round robin event for those who said they wanted more information. We could have one person talk about WE in general, then each committee member could get 3-5 minutes to explain what they do and the tasks they need and profiles they are looking for. Then we could open it up to questions (or get into breakout rooms and have the board members switch rooms vs. the potential volunteers)
  • Will we be inviting/including the current Board or newly elected Board? Some of these questions may not be appropriate to ask an outgoing Board member (e.g., their future plans in their positions).

    After seeing the results from this survey, what are some things you’re most excited about doing in your position to help WE better serve our members?
    Given our commitment to anti-racism through diversity, equity, inclusion, justice, and representation, what are some ways you’ll be working in your position to incorporate these principles?
    The Board has stated that our pathway toward progress is to reflect, evaluate, and implement. What does this mean to you as Board member and for Washington Evaluators as a whole?
    How do we find creative ways to engage our members through socially distant times?
    How has the pandemic helped us discover or leverage new ways to keep evaluators connected?
  • Patricia/Beeta

    Note: If we feature the “new” Board, we would have to shift these names.
  • ×