- Political Mutual Funds
- NPC Analysis
- Selection Process
- Benefits
Our motivation to create the NPC Analysis came from the continuous feedback from members of our network telling us that they need help navigating politics and understanding how their contributions are affecting political change. We created the NPC Analysis to capture the political value of all types of organizations, in a sense, making the invisible, visible.
An NPC Analysis provides a synthesis of the information an organization has supplied on its PROI™ self-reported data. An NPC Analysis seeks to provide a trustworthy and accurate picture of the organization’s work, its relative performance against its peers, and its impact. NPC considers the following when conducting its Analysis: an organization’s strategy, effectiveness, whether it is filling a gap, degree of innovation, PROI™ data, potential, track record, and team. As a result, the Analysis may be significantly more positive or negative than the Core and Sector scores may suggest.
| NPC Analysis: | |
|---|---|
| Strategy | The organization’s strategy is sound. |
| Effectiveness | The organization produces significant value and results. |
| Fills a Gap | The organization fills an important gap in the landscape. |
| Innovation | The organization is either working in an innovative way or producing innovative results. |
| PROI™ Analysis | The organization’s relative performance among similar organizations is strong. |
| Potential | The organization has the potential to be game-changing. |
| Track Record | The organization has evidence of strong past performance. |
| Team | The organization has produced exceptional results given its staffing structure. |
PROI™ data is a key component of an NPC Analysis. Our proprietary methodology is one way for an organization to demonstrate relative performance against its peers and better communicate the value of its work through self-reported quantitative and qualitative information.
PROI™ is made up of a Core Score and Sector Score:
PROI™ Core Score
The PROI™ Core score is comprised of three metrics: leadership, growth, and reputation. Each Core metric has a set of corresponding indicators for which organizations provide data. These metrics are weighted differently; for example, the leadership metric accounts for 50% of the Core score.
To make sure that no one indicator disproportionately affects the results, we apply a normal distribution (using standard deviation) to limit the maximum impact of any given data point.
The Core score is calculated by comparing the performance of the organization to the average performance of the other organizations. The Core score calculates and compares each of the Core metrics of all organizations that have collected PROI™ data.
We use a formula that relies on averages and weightings to arrive at the final Core scores.
To illustrate how organizations performed relative to one another, NPC uses the following scale:
Core Scale: AAA Performed 15 points above the average AA Performed 5 points above the average A Performed on average as well as others B Performed 3 points below the average C Performed 8 points below the average
To supplement the Core score, we also display how each organization performed on its Core metrics. The terms "Very Strong," "Strong," "Average," and "Need Improvement" appear in the NPC Analysis. We define these terms based on the following scale:
Metric Scale: Very Strong Performed 0.15 points above the average Strong Performed 0.075 points above the average Average 0.125 points below average to .075 points above the average Needs Improvement Performed 0.125 points below the average PROI™ Sector Score
Sector metrics help articulate how well an organization is delivering a specific value compared to other organizations in the Sector. The PROI™ of organizations working in each of the six Sectors is defined as follows:
- Media
Ability to increase the number of diverse and effective distribution channels and/or expand the market for consumption of progressive thoughts and opinions, taking into account distribution, content produced and/or disseminated, reputation/influence on opinion leaders, and cost.- Advocacy
Ability to contribute to the widespread support for and the adoption of progressive positions taking into account winning issue positions, mobilization, membership & volunteers, change in awareness or support, cost, and replication.- Electoral
Ability to contribute to progressive electoral victories and greater civic participation, taking into account wins, voter engagement, fundraising, volunteers, and cost.- Idea Generation
Ability to contribute to the creation and adoption of strong and credible progressive ideas, taking into account reach, adoption of idea/impact on legislation, changes in perception and awareness, influence, and cost.- Infrastructure
Ability to improve the impact and efficiency of organizations working in other sectors taking into account reach, client satisfaction, impact, and cost.- Leadership
Ability to contribute to developing a continuous pipeline of progressive leaders taking into account reach, impact/quality, and cost.Each Sector has 3-6 metrics and each Sector metric is comprised of a set of indicators. Organizations provide data on the various indicators within their Sector. Each metric is weighted differently. For example, in the Electoral Sector, the winning elections metric accounts for 40% of the Electoral Sector score.
The Sector scores are calculated by comparing the performance of the organization to the average performance of the other groups in the Sector. The Sector score focuses only on the data collected for a specific sector, ranking an organization among other organizations in the same Sector.
Sector Scale: AAA Performed 15 points above the average AA Performed 5 points above the average A Performed on average as well as others B Performed 5 points below the average C Performed 10 points below the average
To supplement the Sector score, we also display how each organization performed to its specific metrics. The terms "Very Strong," "Strong," "Average," and "Needs Improvement" appear in the NPC Analysis. We define these terms based on the following relative performance scale:
Metric Scale: Very Strong Performed 0.15 points above the average Strong Performed 0.075 points above the average Average Performed from 0.125 points below to .075 points above the average Needs Improvement Performed 0.125 points below the average
Third Party Verification
Individuals told us that it is critical that they are able to trust the information they get about an organization when making funding decisions. Because PROI™ relies on self-reported data from organizations, we’ve developed a process that will ensure trust and confidence in the information presented.
We have partnered with Social Venture Technology Group, who independently verifies the data. This verification process is not an audit; it is merely a process that confirms that the data reported is traceable and from legitimate sources.
Levels of Verification: Level I Data verified with no concerns Level II Data verified with some concerns Level III Could not verify data provided
SVT will be assigning these three levels of verification based on three elements:
- Person-trail: Accountability of a specific individual within the organization.
- Source and credibility trail: The sources and credibility ratings of the data that the organization provided.
- Rationale: The rationale used to determine the appropriate sector and answers to related indicators.
