Questions about outcomes drive Children’s Village board to peak performance
What happens when a nonprofit human services CEO and a highly motivated board chairman work together to address systematic issues surrounding the provision of follow-up care to teens leaving residential treatment? The answer is innovation, fast turnaround, and concrete results.
The innovation—a new model for aftercare—and results are described in an article published in the Alliance for Children & Families Magazine. The following companion article provides the CEO’s firsthand account of what happened in between—how a board of trustees planned, executed, and funded a new initiative in only 90 days.
 |
|
|
|
Jeremy Kohomban visits with a student. |
Our story began simply enough. In April 2005 I was telling the chairman of our board of trustees, Bill Krupman, about the students who would be graduating in June from the residential school of the Children’s Village, Dobbs Ferry, N.Y. I recall him asking about outcomes: What impact have we had on their lives? How do we know what’s working?
I gave a few quick global responses to his questions, but my answers were increasingly inadequate as his questions became more specific. Such was the beginning of what I call our dynamic tension: the constructive, necessary, but not always comfortable working alliance between this CEO and the board.
Our conversations continued until graduation day. At graduation, Krupman announced to our students, their families, teachers, honored guests, and the trustees that he had charged me, as CEO, with developing a program to track how well our services have prepared graduates for life back with their families and in their home communities.
He understood the numbers—Children’s Village works with 7,000 youth each year—and he had heard specific success stories at graduation; but he wanted to know more. He wanted to know how each student was doing once they left Children’s Village, not just the few who were tracked long term through our WAY program. (Learn more about the WAY program by reading a short article from the Alliance for Children & Families Magazine.)
Krupman followed this public statement with another announcement at the annual trustee meeting, which was that same afternoon. He told the trustees that he was tasking me with being accountable for tracking our success in preparing teens for life outside of our residential facilities. With these two public pronouncements on the same day, Krupman sent a very clear message; it was a call to action, a challenge, and an expectation to deliver.
 |
|
|
Bill Krupman |
|
The good news is that the board also offered me guidance, but in a nontraditional way.
Board Refused to Back Down
After the meeting, a small group of trustees began asking tough, nonsystemic, customer-service oriented questions: How was success defined? How did we measure it? How did we know when students were successful? Where were teens one year after they left us? Could we reach them? Can we offer them incentives to stay in touch with us? Are they happy with us? Would they recommend us? Can we deliver on any of this, or is the system simply an emergency room with no long-term vision?
Some of these questions were brutal; many were brilliant. These were not the type of questions I typically find boards raising internally. These are the questions most often raised by your critics.
Many boards, I have found, shy away from confrontation. A few are even quick to accept mediocrity; they go soft on the inside, they want to justify their existence, or they just get nervous. But that was not the case for the trustees of the Children’s Village on this particular issue. They wanted to know more.
One of the trustees, Tony Riotto, put it this way, “Let’s find out. We may celebrate or we may be humbled by the answers.”
Ninety-Day Plan In Motion
As it turns out, we were humbled. It was a true learning experience for us all, one that taught me the true meaning of the need for a respectful balance between a board and a CEO.
My chairman’s model of change demanded action, but it didn’t guarantee success. The next few weeks were intense. We worked quickly, and together we identified the issues that needed to be addressed immediately:
- The board wanted to know what happened to our graduates. For example, how many of our youth who spoke of wanting to go to college actually did?
- We did not have funding for this endeavor. Where would it come from?
- We needed a new model, and it couldn’t be a continuation of the traditional model. We needed a cognitive model that recognized transitions and was cost-effective for the long term. What would it look like?
As we set the project in motion and began digging for data on the outcomes of our graduates and other discharged youth, Krupman cautioned me that we would find out things we would not like.
The first meeting was a shock, to say the least. It was a humbling moment. We did indeed find out many things we didn’t like. For example, we found out that three months after youth were discharged from our program, most were still not enrolled in school. This is a major problem because it means most were unsupervised in the community and not attending to the “job” of a teenager, that being education.
If You Build It, They Will Come
Fortunately the timing was good; it was the beginning of a new budget year. We made aftercare a funding priority and shifted funds to seed the project. Because of the board’s clear commitment to funding the program, I knew I’d be able to count on their financial support if nothing else came through.
Fortunately, their diligence on behalf or the organization was enough. Foundations and individual donors, including a few trustees, came through.
Krupman also asked for and received volunteers to form a committee that would help us think through our new aftercare model, as well as to evaluate success or failure. (To learn more about the model, read the article from the Alliance for Children & Families Magazine.)
He asked that the committee meet quarterly, believing in the adage, “What is measured improves.”
This project has further solidified my relationship with the board. We were determined to succeed and we found a path to success. We have also learned that we are an incredible team, capable of tackling difficult systematic issues. This has led to a close collaboration on aftercare and other board issues.
Indeed, through this process we became galvanized, becoming true working partners. Riotto, who is currently chair of the aftercare committee, has likened this process to opening the kimono. In other words, it was a refreshingly open and transparent process; there are no secrets and no spin. We all work together openly, embracing the mission of the organization by doing what’s best for our children and families.
Today I am happy to report that our demonstrated progress is keeping our trustees active, involved, and raising funds. But this never would have happened if Krupman hadn’t been confident enough to take his concern from the backroom—our private conversations—and made his proclamations public.
If his concern about our outcomes had been relegated to the more traditional route of a committee, I believe we would still be blaming “the system” for not funding aftercare and debating the relative virtues of different plans. In short, we would not have moved ahead.
Many boards, I have found, shy away from confrontation. A few are even quick to accept mediocrity; they go soft on the inside, they want to justify their existence, or they just get nervous. But that was not the case for the trustees of Children’s Village on this particular issue. They wanted to know more.
Learn more about Children's Village.
|
Jeremy Kohomban is president and CEO of Alliance member Children’s Village, Dobbs Ferry, N.Y. He has served on numerous boards of directors, including current service on the boards of Child Welfare Watch; New York City’s Youth Advocacy Center; Child Welfare Organizing Project; and American Youth Work Center, publisher of Youth Today. He also serves on the board of the Council of Family and Child Caring Agencies, New York, an Alliance state association member. Kohomban has earned a reputation as a leader who effectively blends human services with accountability and a pragmatic business sense. He is the author of a number of articles and a nationally recognized speaker on topics of organizational leadership, system reform, and family-focused service delivery. He received his undergraduate degree from Teacher’s College at Emporia State University, his master’s from Long Island University, and his doctorate from the School of Global Leadership and Entrepreneurship at Regent University. |
 |
