Organization Assessment and
Abridged Nonprofit Business Analysis Report
Prepared for:
New Mexico Acequia Association
November 2, 2007
Submitted by:
Sandy Jacobsen
FIELDSTONE ALLIANCE
60 Plato Boulevard
Suite 150
St. Paul, MN 55107
www.FieldstoneAlliance.org
sjacobsen@FieldstoneAlliance.org
New Mexico Acequia Association
Organization Assessment and
Abridged Nonprofit Business Analysis Report
Executive Summary
Background
The New Mexico Acequia Association (NMAA) is a state-wide membership organization. Its mission is
to “sustain our way of life by protecting water as a community resource and by strengthening the farming
and ranching traditions of our families and communities.” It is a young organization; in 1999 it received
its first funds, and in 2003 hired its first employee. They are currently experiencing some growing pains,
especially in the administrative side, as they add projects and staff more quickly than their growing
infrastructure has been able to support. Given their situation, NMAA was interested in an impartial
assessment of their organization, to assist them in determining their strategic priorities and the
organizational infrastructure they need to achieve these priorities.
NMAA applied to participate as part of the KAL pilot assessment program, sponsored and funded by the
Kellogg Action Lab (KAL) and conducted by a team of consultants from Fieldstone Alliance in St. Paul,
the Nonprofit Finance Fund in New York, and the accounting firm of Kern, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd. (KDV)
of St. Cloud. The project was led by Sandy Jacobsen, Principal Consultant for Fieldstone Alliance; Brent
Copen of the Nonprofit Finance Fund, and Jennifer Thienes of KDV completed the assessment team.
Because of the small size of the organization, NFF conducted an abridged Nonprofit Business Analysis.
The assessment process began in July 2007 with document collection and planning of the assessment
process. The FA consultant traveled to Santa Fe for the site visit on August 16, which included a full
complement of interviews with board, staff, and other stakeholders. The board and staff were very
engaged in the process, and gave their full attention to the NFF-led webinar on September 12 and the
planning and debrief meeting in Santa Fe on September 20. At that meeting, Sandy Jacobsen presented
recommendations for building and strengthening NMAA’s organization and financial position for the
future. This was followed by an active and productive discussion, with the NMAA board and staff
providing thoughtful comments and feedback to build out the recommendations and build a timeline for
activities. From this discussion, the Stabilization Plan Framework was developed. Finally, the Fieldstone
Alliance consultant completed this final written organizational assessment report.
Summary of Findings
At the debrief and planning meeting, Fieldstone Alliance presented the findings – the strengths,
challenges and recommendations – in each of the six components of organizational capacity. The full
report expands on the findings in each component.
A. Strengths: The organization has many critical strengths of the type that could not simply be created or
added if they didn’t organically exist. NMAA has had a very high impact toward its mission, especially
relative to its size and short history. The people are deeply committed to water rights and the
sustainability of acequias, and are highly skilled and recognized as experts in their field. They have a
strong desire to build their organizational capacity, and a clear understanding of the need and their
individual responsibility in that task. Paula Garcia, executive director, is a strong communicator and very
compelling as she invites others to participate, fund, or otherwise support NMAA activities. Overall, this
adds up to a very high potential for NMAA, and its future effectiveness and impact. This is an
organization that merits further investment in its internal capacity and its program activities.
Fieldstone Alliance
10/26/07
Page 2 of 31
B. Challenges/Opportunities for Improvement: NMAA has been stretched too thinly – too few staff, too
little funding, too little time. To their credit, while they have continued to accomplish a lot, they were
also the first to recognize that they couldn’t keep up the pace of work. As a result, they intentionally let
one project move into “low gear” for the time being. Tasks, and the authority and responsibility to do
them, need to be better allocated among staff members, to take better advantage of staff’s available time
and skills. Internal and external communications need to be improved. Finally, NMAA needs to add one
senior staff person to handle some of the management responsibilities and better distribute the work load.
Recommendations
The following recommendations are simply highlighted here and presented with more discussion in the
body of the report, under the related component of capacity.
1. Mission, vision, and strategy. NMAA should agree on which strategies are top priority and focus
on them, ensuring that those strategies receive the resources they need. Other strategies or
programs should be put “on hold” until the organization has the internal capacity to take on
additional work. While it is not a significant issue, NMAA should clarify which mission
statement they truly “own”, and communicate that consistent focus.
2. Governance and leadership. They need to initially restructure staff responsibilities to better
allocate the work, and then add to staff to build capacity. This recommendation is the primary
focus of the Stabilization Plan Framework.
3. Program delivery and impact. NMAA has already begun to identify top priority programs, and
should further consider each program and its fit with mission versus its cost. A high standard of
effective delivery and reporting should be maintained for all ongoing programs. The staff also
needs to “catch up” on its communications with NMAA members.
4. Finance. NMAA needs to improve their internal and external financial reporting processes, and
develop a resource development plan focused on unrestricted funds. They also need to revisit
staff and board roles in financial reporting, analysis, and planning. When the strategic planning
process is underway, the proposed strategies’ financial implications should be considered.
5. Internal operations and management. They will need to organize the two offices and clarify the
function of both the headquarters and the satellite office. They have begun to consider the
increased communication needs of all, and should evaluate how their current technology helps or
hinders communication. It is agreed that access to and improvements in the database are a high
priority, and that staff will need to be trained in using the database and in other areas.
Capacity Building Plan
The September 20th debrief and planning meeting was well attended by board and staff. The day-long
meeting began with Fieldstone Alliance presenting the recommendations; everyone then engaged in an
active discussion of each recommendation and its implication. The group then considered what should
happen next, and came up with the core elements of the stabilization plan and its elements. The group
also created the timeline for this work, considering the major upcoming events that also needed to be
completed. At that point in the discussion, a dilemma – that of finding the time to even get started on the
action steps – emerged. That challenge was solved for the short-term, as Sandy Jacobsen and Jutta von
Gontard agreed to take on some of the first action steps. Based on the notes from the meeting, they then
created the Stabilization Plan Framework; Jutta volunteered to take on some of the next tasks. One of the
major next action steps will be developing a funding proposal to support capacity building and
implementation of the stabilization plan. With that, the organization is on its way to building future
organizational capacity.
Fieldstone Alliance
10/26/07
Page 3 of 31
New Mexico Acequia Association
Organization Assessment – Nonprofit Business Analysis
Report
Organizational Context
The New Mexico Acequia Association (NMAA) is a state-wide membership organization. Its mission is
to “sustain our way of life by protecting water as a community resource and by strengthening the farming
and ranching traditions of our families and communities.” It is a young organization; in 1999 it received
its first funds, and from 1999 to 2003 Paula Garcia (currently the executive director) was the lone, parttime contractor doing the business of the organization. In 2003 Paula became the first employee, and
NMAA has been adding employees steadily at a rate of about two people per year. They are currently
experiencing some growing pains, especially in the administrative side, as they add projects and staff
more quickly than their growing infrastructure has been able to support the growth. Given their situation,
NMAA was interested in an impartial assessment of their organization, to assist them in determining their
strategic priorities and determining the organizational infrastructure they need.
Background on Assessment
Because of their ongoing challenges and interest in getting an outside assessment of the organization,
NMAA applied to participate as part of the KAL pilot assessment program, to be conducted by Fieldstone
Alliance (FA) and the Nonprofit Finance Fund (NFF). NMAA’s goal in participating in this assessment
is to learn from the findings of an independent assessment team, and use those findings to guide their
organizational capacity building strategies.
The assessment is sponsored and funded by the Kellogg Action Lab (KAL) and conducted by a team of
consultants from Fieldstone Alliance in St. Paul, the Nonprofit Finance Fund in New York, and the
accounting firm of Kern, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd. (KDV) of St. Cloud. The project was led by Sandy
Jacobsen, Principal Consultant for Fieldstone Alliance; Brent Copen of the Nonprofit Finance Fund, and
Jennifer Thienes of KDV completed the assessment team. Because of the relatively small size of the
organization, NFF conducted their abridged Nonprofit Business Analysis.
The assessment process began in July 2007 with document collection and conference calls between
NMAA, Fieldstone Alliance, and the Nonprofit Finance Fund to plan the assessment process. The FA
consultant traveled to Santa Fe for the site visit on August 16, which included a full complement of
interviews with board, staff, and other stakeholders. The NFF consultant led a webinar to review
preliminary results with NMAA leaders on September 12. Through the team’s collective analysis, Sandy
Jacobsen prepared recommendations for building and strengthening NMAA’s organization and financial
positioning for the future.
On September 20, Sandy Jacobsen traveled to Santa Fe for the debrief and planning meeting and
reviewed the findings and recommendations with NMAA board and staff representatives. She presented
the assessment team findings and recommendations; this was followed by an active and productive
discussion, with the NMAA board and staff providing thoughtful comments and feedback to build out the
recommendations and build a timeline for activities. From these notes, the Stabilization Plan Framework
was developed. The Fieldstone Alliance consultant then completed this final written report of the
recommendations and suggested priorities for strengthening NMAA. Concilio member Harold Trujillo is
presenting this report to the Concilio on November 6th.
Fieldstone Alliance
10/26/07
Page 4 of 31
The Concilio, staff, and especially Paula Garcia are to be complimented on their commitment and
involvement in this assessment process. All were very responsive when asked to be available for
interviews and the debrief meeting, which represented significant time and travel for everyone. This
commitment will help ensure that they are successful in achieving their goal of building NMAA’s
capacity.
Methodology
In June 2007 Executive Director Paula Garcia and Concilio member Harold Trujillo participated in a
conference call with Sandy Jacobsen and Brent Copen to review the assessment planning process and
agree on the work plan. This discussion was captured in the July 2007 letter agreement, signed by Paula
Garcia, Harold Trujillo, and Fieldstone Alliance. The letter agreement also contained a list of the
documents required (a copy of which had been sent earlier to NMAA) by FA and NFF for the assessment.
The required document checklist is in Attachment C of this report. NMAA gathered those documents
over a period of time and sent them to FA, which in turn forwarded them to other members of the
assessment team for review and analysis.
The three assessment team members reviewed the data and compared their preliminary analysis prior to
the first on-site meeting on August 16. Sandy Jacobsen of FA traveled to Santa Fe and conducted an
extensive series of interviews all during the day and into the next morning. NMAA had done an excellent
job of arranging interviews with people who offered a broad range of perspectives on the organization and
its history. Every person was very forthcoming and offered useful and thoughtful ideas on the
organization’s current situation and future potential. Everyone painted the same picture, of a very
talented and committed executive director and staff, and Concilio members who were deeply engaged in
the needs of acequias and the issue of water rights.
Brent Copen of NFF organized the webinar on September 12 and prepared the abridged NBA analysis
that was presented during the webinar. Paula Garcia, Harold Trujillo, Mikki Anaya, and Ruth Solomon
of NMAA participated, as did Sandy Jacobsen and Jennifer Thienes. Unfortunately Alfredo Montoya,
Concilio treasurer, was unable to participate due to technical phone difficulties. The group reviewed the
NBA charts, discussed the implications, and reviewed the general recommendations presented. Jennifer
Thienes and Brent Copen also reviewed the incorrect categorization of grants and contributions in the
financial statements. In one sense this made some of the NBA charts incorrect, but it also pointed to
some useful improvements in reporting and analysis that NMAA could undertake.
On September 20, Sandy Jacobsen traveled to Santa Fe for the debrief and planning meeting with staff
and Concilio members to discuss the findings and recommendations, and to begin planning for the
organization’s next steps. Again, it was a well-attended meeting, and an active, productive discussion
with everyone present followed. Using the PowerPoint presentation (shown as Attachment G but
presented as a separate electronic file), the group walked through each finding and recommendation,
considering the ideas presented and analyzing the implications. The ideas and decisions reached were
captured in the meeting notes. From this rich discussion, the key elements of a stabilizing plan, the next
steps and the timeline were created. Those notes were shared with the executive director and an
independent local consultant, Jutta von Gontard. The following week Jutta and Sandy refined those notes
into the Stabilization Plan Framework (see Attachment F), and began work on the Action Steps. The
Fieldstone Alliance consultant then prepared a preliminary written report, for review by Paula Garcia and
Harold Trujillo for any needed revisions. The end result is this final written report of the
recommendations and suggested priorities for strengthening NMAA.
Fieldstone Alliance
10/26/07
Page 5 of 31
FINDINGS:
ORGANIZATIONAL STRENGTHS AND CHALLENGES BY COMPONENT OF CAPACITY
Mission, Vision, and Strategy
The mission of the New Mexico Acequia Association, as stated in the bylaws in 2002, is “to promote the
long-term viability of acequias as culturally and economically viable elements of New Mexico’s
traditional communities.” Another document states that NMAA is “working to sustain the connection
between land, water, and our communities by strengthening acequia governance and promoting native
food traditions.” The mission has evolved to what it is now: “our mission is to sustain our way of life by
protecting water as a community resource and by strengthening the farming and ranching traditions of our
families and communities.”
Each of these statements has a slightly different focus, though each accurately states the interrelationship
of important elements that affect acequias. The first statement focuses on the viability of acequias, the
second on acequia governance and native food traditions, and the third on water rights and farming and
ranching traditions. While all of these are important, they each point to a different set of activities for the
organization. Since they can’t do it all with the existing organizational capacity, this point highlights the
hard decisions NMAA has to make as they sort out these priorities. To do this, they first have to agree on
a single mission statement that lays out clearly those strategies the organization will focus on.
NMAA created a five-year strategic plan in 2002. It included specific timelines and responsibilities, but
not a budget, financial implications or a comprehensive view of how NMAA would look if all of the
goals and objectives were met. The Concilio annually reviews the strategic plan to determine whether
NMAA’s actual activities are included in the plan, and whether there are any plan activities that still need
to be addressed. This kind of intense annual review by the Concilio is very useful to keeping the strategic
plan alive as a framework for development. The offset is that, according to the executive director, each
time the Concilio reviews the plan, there is a tendency to add objectives to it without adequately
considering the resources needed to achieve those objectives.
In December 2005, Paula Garcia began to revise the strategic plan, in preparation for the annual
discussion and a deeper review by the Concilio. The plan as it stands offers some significant challenges,
however; under the seven goals, there are a great many objectives and activities, many more than such a
small organization could possibly undertake. This plan really illustrates the challenges, in that the
NMAA leadership has a far greater vision for what they can do than they have capacity to deliver.
The organization is aware that it needs to undertake its next strategic planning process, and has made
plans to begin the strategic planning process in the spring of 2008. The timing for strategic planning was
determined by prioritizing the needs and determining that some initial stabilizing steps should be
undertaken first. The timeline agreed to by the board and staff of NMAA is summarized at the end of the
Stabilization Plan Framework.
Governance and Leadership
As a membership organization, NMAA has a Congreso, or Board of Directors, and a Concilio, or
Executive Board. Members include regional acequia associations, acequia members, and parciantes
(irrigation water users); voting delegates to the Congreso are elected from among the regional acequia
associations and the acequia members. The 11 members of the Concilio are elected at the annual meeting
of the Congreso, and the four officers of the Concilio make up the Executive Committee. The Concilio is
the board that meets regularly and has the standard board responsibilities; hereafter any reference to the
board refers to the Concilio.
Paula Garcia is the founding and current executive director. She is well-known in the acequia community
and highly respected among state and legislative officials. She has a strong command of the field, the
Fieldstone Alliance
10/26/07
Page 6 of 31
regulations, and the issues, and is very effective in determining the direction the organization needs to
take. Paula also attracts funders and other supporters, and is clearly a visionary leader. However, she is
also tremendously overscheduled, and struggles with trying to accomplish everything she needs and
wants to do, and with the travel logistics and planning each task requires. Paula is well aware of what is
going well, and what is suffering from a lack of attention, and is very interested in building the
organization’s capacity so that NMAA can be successful in the many opportunities and programs in front
of it.
The staff members (in addition to Paula) are very committed and knowledgeable; they have the skills they
need to successfully run programs, manage the office, and connect with members. However, they are also
strained, sometimes trying to cover more than they have time to undertake, and struggling to maintain the
communication levels needed to coordinate the many NMAA activities.
The Concilio members are also very committed to the mission and well connected to the stakeholders –
the acequias, the legislators, the community partners. However, they inadvertently contribute to Paula’s
challenge with over-scheduling, by communicating directly with her instead of broadening their
communication to other staff members, by bringing local acequia issues to Paula to address, and by
reviewing financial reports and business/strategic plans that she first drafts, rather than being more
integrally involved themselves in the strategic thinking and oversight of the financials. Everyone agreed
that there was a real risk of Paula “burning out”; if she left the organization at any time soon, it would be
difficult for NMAA to sustain itself. So there is an urgent need to both provide relief to Paula and to plan
ahead for greater organizational sustainability.
During the debrief and planning meeting on September 20th, these recommendations for restructuring
NMAA’s staffing to improve organization capacity were discussed:

Review the job responsibility allocation. Consider the roles and responsibilities of the current
staff (and to some degree, the Concilio), and reallocate responsibilities, including the related
decision-making authority.

Consider adding an associate director. In discussions with the group, it was agreed that while an
add to staff is definitely needed, it may be a role other than an associate director. The main goal
would be to add a person who could concentrate on some of the day-to-day management, so that
Paula could concentrate on meeting with funders, community leaders, and partners, and providing
the visionary leadership.

Contact Panta Rhea Foundation for capacity building funding. The Panta Rhea Foundation was
identified as a likely source of funding that would be needed to support an addition to staff and
other capacity building strategies, because of their earlier indication of interest. There may be
other possible funders. Since at least one funder has indicated interest, it will be important to
“warm up” their interest so that funding might be made available sooner rather than later.

Carefully consider the transitional issues. Given the heavy work load everyone is carrying,
addressing these recommendations is no easy task; there is little available time. Making changes
like this can cause turmoil and additional stresses, so transitional issues need to be considered.
The group began to address this by suggesting that the Stabilization Plan Framework address the
most pressing, short-term staffing improvements, and then provide the basis for an outline of the
longer-term stabilization plan.

Emphasize communication during the transition. Again, it is difficult to improve and increase
communication, as this recommendation means that Paula needs to take additional time to
communicate with staff on day-to-day tasks as well as longer-term plans and goals. The Concilio
and staff recognized this dilemma, and had a solid first discussion as to what steps each could
take. The Stabilization Plan Framework discusses communication as the second most important
element, and details some of the issues to be addressed around this element.
Fieldstone Alliance
10/26/07
Page 7 of 31

Consider future staffing and training needs. Additional staffing and the staff’s training needs will
be addressed more in the long-term planning. There are some training needs that may need to be
dealt with sooner, such as for the access to and use of the database.
Program Delivery and Impact
This is the full mission statement:
Our mission is to sustain our way of life by protecting water as a community resource and strengthening
the farming and ranching traditions of our families and communities. We work to defend acequia water
rights to ensure that our communities have a clean and secure water supply for growing food and other
community needs for generations to come. We have one campaign and three programs through which we
work to achieve our mission:

El Agua es la Vida: A grassroots campaign building unity around the principle of “water is life”
through cultivating members and allies to counter the commodification of water. Part of this
campaign is the 800 soldados plan where experienced leaders (Cabecillas) participate in
mentoring/training new leaders to build an active base for mobilization and organizing.

Water Governance: A project strengthening acequia governance to retain local, democratic
control over water rights through community education and policy advocacy at the local and
state levels.

Nuestra Cosecha: A project rebuilding local food systems and food economies through food
sovereignty assessments, community food projects, and policy development at the local, state, and
federal levels.

Sembrano Semillas: A youth project to build the next generation of acequia farmers, ranchers,
and community leaders through hands-on, seasonal agricultural activities and mentorship.
At a 2005 Cabecilla meeting, the executive director outlined the Acequia Framework for SelfDetermination. The graphic that illustrated this framework included five overlapping circles. The center
circle represented culture, and the other circles governance, policy, organizing, and youth and farming.
Underlying all of this is working the land and education and communication. The framework clearly
identifies the important interrelating elements, all of which inform and support the other. In the long
term, all of these elements need attention and action for the mission to be effectively achieved. However,
the challenge is in tackling all of these important areas with the limited resources NMAA has at this stage
of its growth. This means that some programs have to be temporarily set aside.
NMAA has developed and implemented strong programs that have direct impact on the mission. It has
also developed other programs that have a useful but less direct impact on its mission. Because of its
visibility and unique position in the field, NMAA is often approached to get involved in programs and
services that are very worthwhile, but only peripherally related to water rights. It is also tempting, when
there is available funding, to get involved in additional programs. However, with the small size of the
organization, it is too challenging to address policy and legislative issues, the Farm Bill Forum, and
sustainable food, youth, farming, and heritage seeds programs all at once. NMAA has already determined
that it cannot continue with all of the programs it has until it builds its internal infrastructure and
capabilities of taking on additional programs. The executive director called a halt to new programs, and
has deferred continuing development of the youth program until the organization’s capacity is increased.
NMAA has an important voice and a critical impact on water rights issues in New Mexico. It is one of
the few organizations paying attention to this important issue, and the only one focused on acequias. In
that sense, it is easy to answer whether their work has a significant positive impact – it certainly does.
The 2007 legislative session will be of particular importance, as it is a 60-day session on policy and it is
expected that numerous water bills will be introduced. (Governor Richardson declared 2007 as the Year
Fieldstone Alliance
10/26/07
Page 8 of 31
of Water for the legislative session.) This is where NMAA needs to put its time and attention, but
frequently local issues can demand NMAA’s scarce time and resources. The organization has to consider
whether its impact is diluted by the many acequias that demand time and attention to their individual
challenges. Sometimes those local issues play into the larger, state-wide battle over competing water
rights, and so are important to address. At other times, the local issues are simply a time-consuming
diversion. NMAA agreed that it is hard to sort out these many requests, but that it will at times be
necessary to turn down a request, refer a caller to someone else, or suggest ways the caller can deal with
the problem independently.
Strong funding support for programs exists, including the Kellogg Foundation (the food project); Panta
Rhea Foundation (partnership with NMLA, acequia organizing, water policy, and acequia governance and
workshops); the Christensen Fund (Sembrando Semillias Acequia Youth Project); and the Marguerite
Casey Foundation (general operating support). NMAA attracts attention from funders, so access to
program funder is not a particular challenge.
One of the most critical needs is for an additional full-time staff member, to take some of the pressure off
the executive director and others. In discussions, this new person was referred to as an associate director,
but he/she may instead be a full-time office manager, program manager, or another role. The
Stabilization Plan Framework developed during the debrief and planning meeting focused on the
immediate short-term staffing improvements, that would then lead to the outline of a funding proposal to
support capacity building and provide both the funding for the new position and clarity around the roles
and responsibilities of this new person. Adding another highly qualified staff member would remove
some significant barriers to the program work NMAA is otherwise well-qualified to undertake.
NMAA is also not where it wants to be in its member relationships. They pointed to a need to
acknowledge members, address changing membership, develop and send a quarterly newsletter, and
communicate with members and get feedback on legislative issues. The newsletter in particular is one
effective way of communicating; NMAA’s is very professionally produced, and has been send out
approximately annually. They would like to produce one each quarter, but have not been able to do so
due to a lack of available time.
One of the recommendations is for NMAA to evaluate each program, as well as its fit with the mission
versus its cost (costs including financial, time, political capital, etc.) With that information, they can
better agree on the top priority programs to continue. For each of the continuing programs, NMAA
should maintain the highest standards of effective delivery and timely, accurate reporting. If those high
standards are not met, then it is a signal that the organizational capacity needs further building in order to
meet the delivery and reporting requirements.
The NMAA executive director and some board members are involved in policy issues, which ramp up
during the New Mexico legislative session. NMAA is aware of the limitations on lobbying by nonprofit
organizations and believes they are within the limitations. Because there were some questions as to how
these limitations are defined, and whether NMAA would be able to demonstrate its compliance if
required, a recommendation is that they review the specific limitations and measures of the requirement,
and ensure that they are tracking activities so as to demonstrate compliance.
As mentioned, there is a lot of pressure on existing staff to manage current programs, and a new staff
member was recently hired to help with one of the programs. Two board members also work on contract
with certain programs. When board members are paid for their services, the contract and agreements
have to be fully disclosed and all activities must be very transparent. It is better to act with an abundance
of caution in this area. During the interviews it was stated that these contracts had received prior approval
from the board. However, it seems that the understanding of what is involved and what is to be billed
could be made more explicit.
Fieldstone Alliance
10/26/07
Page 9 of 31
Strategic Relationships
NMAA is an attractive collaborative partner to others, because of its high visibility, political and
community connections, and unique position in the field. They are often approached to partner on a
project or event, and almost as often agree to assist. However, the benefit of the many relationships they
have with others seems to be more to the other organizations, rather than to NMAA. It can be very
distracting and time-consuming to participate in a series of events or program activities, especially if they
are not strategically tied to the organization’s mission and its highest priority strategies.
One of the most, if not the most, productive strategic relationships NMAA has is with New Mexico Legal
Aid (NMLA). Together they have coordinated statewide acequia governance workshops, provided
technical assistance to individual acequias, and developed the Acequia Governance Handbook. Many of
the current issues around water rights require the skills of both organizations to address, so there is a clear
benefit to each to collaborate. The executive director of NMLA has also made it very clear that he is
interested in strengthening the bonds between the two organizations, and finding ways to work together
more successfully tackle water rights issues in the state.
Paula Garcia is often invited to speak at symposiums and conferences. As difficult as it is to decline these
offers, she has increasingly had to do this, in order to focus specifically on the needs of NMAA and its
members. Especially at this time, it is important for her to pick just those speaking engagements (and
invitations to partner together on a one-time event or a larger project) that relate very closely to NMAA’s
mission and that will further the selected partnerships that are critical to NMAA’s future.
There is room to further strengthen and focus strategic relationships through these three steps.

Clarify which strategies should have the highest priority: While many potential partners will
contact NMAA, the organization should agree to partner only with those agencies and/or events
that offer some benefit that is tied to one of the identified top priorities. Partnerships around lowpriority strategies or issues will use more resources than the benefits they produce.

Review current partnerships: After evaluating the current partnerships and the relevant costs and
benefits of each, NMAA should determine whether the partnership should be continued, reduced
in scale (to a simpler type of cooperation, for example), or discontinued. One rule of thumb is
that an established organization can maintain no more than two major and two simpler
partnerships at a time. An organization undergoing significant change as NMAA is will be able
to manage less than that.

Deepen targeted relationships: The few top priority partnerships should be thoughtfully analyzed
so that both partner organizations can benefit the most through an efficient use of their resources.
New Mexico Legal Aid is a likely candidate for an even deeper relationship. That does require a
commitment on the part of both organizations to agree on what they together can successfully
achieve, and what is the most effective and efficient way to achieve it.
Financial Management
The financial position of NMAA at first glance is healthy. At December 31, 2006, the total audited net
assets were $198,000, which represents approximately five months’ of expenses, based on the 2006
expense level. The organization does not have any debt, and the obligations are relatively minor. In
2004, the financial health of NMAA was not as strong; they had a beginning audited net asset position of
approximately $26,000. The increase in net assets was due to an influx of large grant and foundation
funds for fiscal years 2005 and 2006 that were not yet spent.
Because most of the funds received by NMAA are grants, the funds are expected to be spent on programs
and not maintained for a reserve. The audited financial statement shows the net asset balance as
unrestricted funds. This means that while the audited balance sheet of NMAA is healthy now, it will be
Fieldstone Alliance
10/26/07
Page 10 of 31
difficult to maintain that healthiness when the funds are spent as required. Without an increase in the
unrestricted revenue, the net asset balance, or equity, will decline. This same situation was demonstrated
in 2004, when the cash reserves were depleted. While it is very difficult at this stage of a young
organization to focus on building the reserve, it will be critical in ensuring the sustainability of the
organization.
This issue is evident by the fact that, other than the Executive Director, the staff does not take the time,
have responsibility for the duties, or have the expertise to distinguish between “grants” and
“contributions”. While the Executive Director has the internal knowledge and processes to perform grant
reporting to ensure funds are being spent properly, the internal accounting system and the financial
statements produced for the Concilio and the audit are not aligned with this same reporting system.
Grants, strictly defined, have expectations of service deliverables and contributions do not. When a
foundation provides what is commonly called a “grant” to an organization, there generally are not specific
expectations with specific outcomes, other that to apply to a specific program or to the general
advancement of the mission. From an accounting standpoint, these “grants” should be classified as
“contributions”, and then further clarified as to whether they are “restricted” or “unrestricted”. True
grants are for specific services and are classified as earned income.
Currently, the financial statements classify all foundation funds as “grants”, with the funds from the
Department of Administration and Finance shown on the internal statements under its own category. Our
first recommendation is that each of these revenue sources in the accounting system be reviewed by staff
or an accounting consultant, to ensure the classification is correct for each, and to track the remaining
funds that are required to be spent with the internal reports and documents that the Executive Director
prepares for the funders. Once the review and education takes place, a process to be established to ensure
a reconciliation of revenue sources is implemented between the Executive Director grant reports and the
internal financial statements. That will put readers of NMAA’s financial statements (including the
Concilio) in a better position to understand what funds are available to be spent.
While the fiscal year 2006 audited balance sheet and income statements appear healthy, the overall
financial health of the organization is at a crossroads. The current revenue level is past the neworganization stage, where operations are small and expectations often low. At this point, internal and
external expectations are building for program expansion and/or greater results. The challenge is that at
this stage, it typically is not cost effective to add the resources needed to obtain the desired results. For
example, NMAA could benefit from creating a fund development plan that would in turn allow them to
procure unrestricted funds that could be used to build their financial and organizational infrastructure.
Our second financial recommendation is to evaluate an operating cycle to determine the level of desired
unrestricted reserve.
The internal financial reports are created through the combined effort of the executive director, office
manager, and accountant. While it is not always an efficient communication process, it results in accurate
and appropriate financial reporting (with the exception of the grants/contributions discussion above).
NMAA has financial statements that many other small organizations have not yet prepared. With the one
significant exception, revenues and expenses are correctly labeled and classified. Impressively, the
financials have also been prepared on an accrual basis since 2006.
At the board level, the financial decision making processes are currently sufficient, but that is only
because the board is highly dependent on the executive director to present the financial reports, analyze
the information, and make financial decisions with a conscious understanding of the financial
implications. While the executive director has a deep understanding of the financial position, activities
and specifics of the accounting system, this system leads to a deeper dependence on her than is
appropriate. It is inappropriate because of the excessive demands it places on one person, the lack of real
board oversight it offers, and the lack of creative input from multiple people it offers as the organization
grows and becomes involved in new activities. Several changes could improve this situation, including
having the staff accountant prepare the financial statements and reports for the board, and deepening the
Fieldstone Alliance
10/26/07
Page 11 of 31
responsibility of the board treasurer and the finance committee to carefully analyze the reports and
present their findings to the board.
The audit report for 2006 was mailed to the board members, without any discussion documented in the
board minutes. This illustrates that the board oversight should be strengthened. Several financial
management practices that should be implemented include:

The budget should be approved prior to the start of the fiscal year, ideally as the strategic plan is
reviewed;

The budget should be monitored on at least a monthly basis, with variances presented with the
financial report by the treasurer;

The budget should be entered into the accounting system, so as to provide the board with the
financial resource tool to facilitate monitoring; and

The finance committee should be involved in creating the budget.
Internal Operations and Management
NMAA shares a small office space in Santa Fe with two other nonprofit organizations. While the office
is convenient to the Santa Fe legislature, supports basic office functions, and is affordable, it offers very
limited privacy and office space, and only some shared meeting space. The space will likely not be
available to NMAA within six months, which forces the question of where the organization will be
headquartered. At the same time, NMAA established a satellite office in Mora, with the reasoning being
that it limits the two-hour commute the executive director has to the Santa Fe office, it is convenient to
many acequia and board members, and the space is large and relatively inexpensive. There are many
good reasons to maintaining two locations, related to the need for a Santa Fe location and the location of
the members and the staff. However, NMAA should move quickly to determine the function of the two
locations and confirm which location is the organizational headquarters, so that members and the staff are
clear as to what will take place where. NMAA will also need to move quickly given the pending planned
changes around the Santa Fe location.
The main challenge the staff faces is that there is too much to do, spread over too few people with too
little time. Each of the staff members, from the executive director to the contracted part-time staff, are
highly skilled and committed to the mission of the organization. However, there has not been enough
time or attention paid to defining who is doing what work, and what is not getting done. This issue
received the most attention at the planning and debrief meeting, and defining the roles and responsibilities
so as to improve the ease and effectiveness of everyone’s efforts is the top priority element of the
Stabilization Plan Framework.
Internal operations are complicated by the fact that there are now two office locations, and that the staff
travels frequently; scheduling and connecting with others becomes a bit more challenging. Some of these
challenges can be addressed through syncing IT systems. The organization could benefit by improving
their technological resources, skills, and tools in other ways as well. Some technical difficulties, around
pulling financial reports or printing labels, and the need for additional communication equipment, were
noted. While a technology review is beyond the scope of this assessment, NMAA would benefit from
having a technology professional review equipment and training needs, and the interactivity between the
two offices, to look for process improvements.
The member database is in need of attention. In 2005-2006 NMAA had identified building a state-wide
acequia database as a top priority, and had begun gathering information from the Cabecillas and
investigating other sources including the comprehensive databases maintained by the federal and district
courts. Four staff also committed to participating in trainings offered by the Progressive Technology
Project. However, whether it is solely due to the limited time available from staff or due to other causes,
Fieldstone Alliance
10/26/07
Page 12 of 31
the database is clearly in need of updating. There also needs to be clarity as to who has access to the
database and for what purpose, and the staff may still be in need of training. In the database’s current
state it is “creating bottlenecks every day”. During the planning and debrief meeting, the staff and board
identified this as a high priority that needed to be addressed quickly, especially as the annual meeting will
be held in December and members will need to be contacted.
There was extensive discussion of the communication needs of the staff (including the executive director)
and the board. The discussion focused especially on the communication among and between the staff and
the executive director, and the challenges of limited time to communicate, discuss and make decisions
about many things. Board members also contribute to the communication difficulties, as their
communications and calls go almost exclusively to the executive director, as do most of the calls from the
staff. This creates a bottleneck, which is almost impossible for any one person to deal with. During the
planning and debrief meeting, everyone agreed that it was important to drill down into this issue,
determining what is meant by “communication”, differentiating between shared decision making and
communicating on day-to-day tasks, and searching for ways in which everyone could contribute to
smoother, more timely communications.
NMAA does not have any written financial policies. They understand the need for these policies, and
acknowledge that it is time to put them in place. As with the other tasks in front of them, NMAA’s
challenge will be to prioritize each task and find the time to write and implement the policies.
Summary Strengths
The organization has many critical strengths, of the type that could not simply be created or added if they
weren’t already there. NMAA has had a very high impact toward its mission, especially relative to its
size and short history. The people are deeply – and even fiercely – committed to water rights and the
sustainability of acequias. They are highly skilled and recognized as experts in their field. They have a
strong desire to build their organizational capacity, and a clear understanding of the need and their
individual responsibility. Paula Garcia is a strong communicator and very compelling as she invites
others to participate, fund, or otherwise support NMAA activities. Overall, this adds up to a very high
potential for NMAA, and its future effectiveness and impact. This is an organization that merits further
investment in its internal capacity and its program activities.
Summary Challenges/Opportunities for Improvement
NMAA has been stretched too thinly – too few staff, too little funding, too little time. To their credit,
while they have continued to accomplish a lot, they were also the first to recognize that they couldn’t
keep up the frantic pace, and that some tasks were beginning to slip. They are committed to doing high
quality work, and so have intentionally let some projects lapse and have not requested continuing project
funding until the organization is better prepared to take on more work. Tasks, and the authority and
responsibility to do them, need to be better allocated among staff members, to take better advantage of
individual’s available time and skills. Internal and external communications need to be improved, among
the executive director and other staff and the Concilio; it needs to be done effectively, efficiently, and
respectfully. Finally, NMAA needs to add one senior staff person, to handle some of the management
responsibilities and better distribute the work load.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations are highlighted here and presented with more discussion in the body of
the report, under the related component of capacity.
Fieldstone Alliance
10/26/07
Page 13 of 31
1. Mission, vision, and strategy
NMAA should agree on which strategies are top priority and focus on them, ensuring that those
strategies receive the resources they need. Other strategies or programs should be put “on hold” until
the organization has the internal capacity to take on additional work. While it is not a significant
issue, NMAA should clarify which mission statement they truly “own”, and communicate a consistent
focus on top priority programs that fulfill that mission.
2. Governance and leadership
They need to, initially, restructure staff responsibilities to better allocate the work, and then add to
staff to build capacity. This recommendation is the primary focus of the Stabilization Plan
Framework.
3. Program delivery and impact
NMAA has already begun to identify top priority programs, and should further consider each program
and its fit with mission versus its cost. A high standard of effective delivery and timely, accurate
reporting should be maintained for all ongoing programs. The staff also needs to “catch up” on its
communications with NMAA members, and ensure that important information is being shared with
them.
4. Finance
The Finance section above details the recommendations that NMAA correct the reporting of different
revenue sources, and begin work on resource development plan focused on unrestricted funds. They
also need to revisit staff and board roles in financial reporting, analysis, and planning. When the
strategic planning process is underway, the proposed strategies’ financial implications need to be
considered.
5. Internal operations and management
They will need to organize the two offices and clarify the function of both the headquarters and the
satellite offices. They have begun to consider the increased communication needs of all, and should
evaluate how their current technology helps or hinders communication. It is agreed that access to and
improvements in the database are a high priority, and that staff will need to be trained in using the
database and in other things.
Capacity Building Plan
The September 20th debrief and planning meeting was well attended by board and staff. The day-long
meeting began with Fieldstone Alliance presenting the recommendations (see Attachment G) and
everyone engaging in an active discussion of each recommendation and its implication. The group then
considered what should happen next, and came up with the core elements of the stabilization plan and its
elements. The group also created the timeline for this work, considering some of the major events (the
annual meeting, the legislative session, and strategic planning) that also needed to be completed and the
action steps that would be required. At that point in the discussion, a dilemma – that of finding the time
to even get started on the action steps – emerged. That challenge was solved for the short-term, as Sandy
Jacobsen and Jutta von Gontard agreed to take on some of the first action steps. The following week they
refined the notes from the meeting into what is shown in the Attachment F, and Jutta volunteered to take
on the significant action step of conducting staff interviews as part of the due diligence in developing a
preliminary analysis and presenting it to Paula for her consideration. There will certainly be additional
action steps to take, and also a funding proposal to support capacity building and implementation of the
stabilization plan will need to be created. But even with that, the organization is on its way to building
future organizational capacity.
Fieldstone Alliance
10/26/07
Page 14 of 31
Attachments
Attachment A:
Organization Assessment Description
Attachment B:
Nonprofit Business Analysis Description
Attachment C:
Data Collection Sources
Attachment D:
Rating System
Attachment E:
NMAA’s Ratings
Attachment F:
Stabilization Plan Framework: October 4, 2007
Attachment G:
Fieldstone Alliance PowerPoint Presentation: September 20, 2007
Fieldstone Alliance
10/26/07
Page 15 of 31
Attachment A
FIELDSTONE ALLIANCE
ORGANIZATIONAL ASSESSMENT
The Fieldstone Alliance Organizational Assessment is designed to lay the groundwork for building the capacity of
an organization to better accomplish its mission. The assessment provides an overview of an organization’s current
capabilities and identifies areas where changes will yield the greatest benefit. The process is based on the following
understanding of what capacity building is and six interdependent factors that contribute to the health and
performance of a nonprofit organization.
WHAT CAPACITY BUILDING IS
Capacity is an abstract term that describes a wide
range of capabilities, knowledge, and resources that
nonprofits need in order to be effective.
Organizational capacity is multifaceted and
continually evolving. This figure depicts the elements
of nonprofit organizational capacity. Capacity
building involves planful, systematic development of
an organization’s ability to deliver on their mission,
including attention to all of these aspects of capacity.
COMPONENTS OF NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY
The model shown in the figure above includes six components of organizational capacity that are necessary for high
performance: mission, vision, and strategy; governance and leadership; program delivery and impact; strategic
relationships; finance; and internal operations. These interdependent factors all contribute to the health and
performance of a nonprofit organization. The model also suggests continual interaction between the organization’s
external environment and its internal components.
Mission, Vision, and Strategy: The organization has a vital mission and a clear understanding of its identity. It is able
to clearly articulate organizational values. It is actively involved in regular, results-oriented, strategic, and self-reflective
thinking and planning that aligns strategies with the mission, values, and organizational capacity. The planning process
involves stakeholders in an ongoing dialogue that ensures that the organization’s mission and programs are aligned and
relevant to constituencies served.
Governance and Leadership: Members of the organization’s board of directors are engaged and representative, with
defined and appropriate governance practices. The board effectively oversees the policies, programs, and organizational
operations including review of achievement of strategic goals, financial status, and executive director performance. The
organization is accomplished at recruiting, developing, and retaining capable staff and technical resources. Internal
communications are effective, and the organization’s culture promotes high-quality work and respectful work
relationships. The organization’s leadership is alert to changing community needs and realities.
Program Delivery and Impact: The organization operates programs and conducts activities that demonstrate tangible
outcomes and impact appropriate to the resources invested. The organization demonstrates a concern for quality and
constant improvement. The organization utilizes program evaluation results to inform its strategic goals. The organization
understands community needs and has formal mechanisms for assessing internal and external factors that affect the
achievement of goals.
Strategic Relationships: The organization is a respected and active participant and leader in the community, and
maintains strong connections with its stakeholders. It participates in strategic alliances and partnerships that significantly
advance the organization’s goals and expand its influence. It communicates well with external audiences. To what extent
does the organization have strategic relationships that advance the organization’s goals?
Finance: The organization exhibits effective leadership in financial planning and management. Long-term financial
strategies are in place. The organization successfully secures support from a variety of sources to ensure its revenues are
diversified, stable, and sufficient for the mission and goals. The resource development plan is aligned with the mission,
long-term goals, and strategic direction.
Internal Operations: The organization has efficient and effective internal operations and systems. The organization
utilizes information effectively for organizational and program management purposes. Asset, risk, and technology
management is strong and appropriate to the organization’s purpose.
Each of the components serves a critical role in an organization’s overall effectiveness. Mission, vision, and strategy are
the driving forces that give the organization its purpose and direction. Program delivery and impact are the nonprofit’s
primary reasons for existence, just as profit is a primary aim for most businesses. Strategic relationships, finance, and
internal operations are all necessary mechanisms to achieve the organization’s ends. Governance and leadership are the
lubricant that keeps all the parts aligned and moving. All of these components are affected by the environment in which
the organization exists.
ORGANIZATION ASSESSMENT PROCESS
When assessing nonprofits and planning capacity building strategies, it is important to examine each component
separately, in relation to the others, and within the organization’s overall context. Organizations operate as complex
systems in which a change in any one part of the system affects other parts and the functioning of the whole. For
example, a change in leadership will affect the organizational culture, which can in turn change productivity levels
and financial performance, for the better or worse. In addition, a variety of factors can influence an organization’s
needs at any time, including:
•
Age and developmental stage of the organization
•
Size of the organization
•
Kind of work the organization does
•
Cultural or ethnic identity of the organization
•
Environment in which the organization functions
These factors require an organizational assessment process that adapts to the timing and unique needs of the
organization. Fieldstone Alliance has developed and tested a multi-phase organizational assessment process based
on the elements described above. In consultation with the organization’s leadership, the consultant works with the
organization through three phases: an information gathering phase, a priority-setting phase, and an action-planning
phase. During each of these phases we combine the best thinking of your board, staff, and stakeholders with the
expertise of an external consultant to result in a plan of action for you to use in strengthening your organization.
© Fieldstone Alliance 2007
Fieldstone Alliance
10/03/07
Page 17 of 31
Attachment B
NBA DESCRIPTION
Successful nonprofit growth, and in some cases survival, depends on the ability to assess and plan for
likely financial outcomes of program or management decisions. The Nonprofit Finance Fund’s ®
Nonprofit Business Analysis (NBA) provides a revealing and impartial report on the financial strengths
and weaknesses of your nonprofit and addresses the likely consequences of those strengths and
weaknesses on your organization's growth, sustainability and survival.
Why an NBA
The NBA is ideal for organizations contemplating or experiencing significant change, such as:




a capital project
change in leadership at the executive or board level
financial or fundraising challenges
program expansion
The NBA can also provide the financial context against which to prepare for or assess the viability of a
strategic plan, which often lacks detailed financial analysis and projections.
How it Helps
Through financial analysis, review of materials and discussions with your leadership, the NBA presents
an easy-to-understand assessment of your organization’s underlying business health and readiness for
change or growth. This process equips nonprofit executives and board members to:

be more aware of underlying financial trends and characteristics, such as revenue/expense
growth, revenue/expense composition and balance sheet composition

evaluate the appropriateness of current financial structure, given your organization’s existing and
proposed activities and needs

use financial planning and management tools, such as monthly cash flow projections and internal
monthly/quarterly budget vs. actual reports

anticipate the impact of a proposed capital or program growth project

establish benchmarks for program productivity and financial performance
In addition, the NBA adds a powerful new dimension to your organization’s story. It allows you to make
a business-based financial case to funders and other stakeholders, as opposed to relying on the appeal of
your programs within a vague financial context. It also improves your ability to provide complete and
accurate picture to board members, donors and lenders and to answer their questions about the financial
condition and needs of your organization.
The NBA process in a nutshell

Step One: We collect information from readily available materials such as audits, 990s, internal
financial reports and budgets.

Step Two: We do a preliminary analysis of your financial condition, which we translate into
graphic presentations that highlight key indicators and trends.
Fieldstone Alliance
10/03/07
Page 18 of 31

Step Three: We meet with the executive director, along with other key staff and board members,
for a robust discussion of our preliminary findings and their potential impact on your
organizational goals.

Step Four: We issue a final report incorporating points clarified during the discussion, as well as
observations and next-step recommendations.

Step Five if you so desire: An optional addition to the standard NBA is a presentation to the full
board by NFF staff, summarizing the final report.
The abridged NBA for Kellogg grantees
For some of the smaller Kellogg grantees, and for those that do not have five years of audited financials,
it may be more useful to employ an abridged version of the NBA for their organization. The abridged
NBA offers a financial analysis that is generally similar to Steps One and Two as described above.
However, rather than an in-person meeting with the organization, NFF will share its preliminary findings
through a telephone conference. Final NFF recommendations will be incorporated into the Fieldstone
Alliance Organization Assessment.
Fieldstone Alliance
10/03/07
Page 19 of 31
Attachment C
DATA COLLECTION SOURCES
Documentation Needed: The Organizational Assessment is an opportunity for feedback and reflection. It is
critical that the consultants who work with you gain a full understanding of your organization. As part of the
assessment process and in advance of the site visit, the consultant will need to see the following documentation.
If these materials are available electronically, please email them, labeled clearly, to Carol Zapfel at
czapfel@FieldstoneAlliance.org. If you don't have something on our list, don’t create anything new unless
you check with us first to see if we can get by or use a substitute. We will keep this information confidential.
Organizational
















Current by-laws
Current mission statement
Any existing statements of vision, programmatic philosophy, organizational values (if not in other documents)
Annual reports for the last three years (if not on your website)
Current or most recent strategic, business, and/or facilities plans
Any reports that compare performance to strategic objectives
Organizational chart including names and positions/jobs. Note tenure of managers.
A brief description of organizational collaborations or alliances
Reports from previous organizational assessments in last three years
Personnel policies (do not send; we will view these on-site)
Full board packet from most recent meeting
Board minutes from the past twelve months
Examples of reports generated that summarize periodic or annual service volume, quality, and financial performance
(something like a Dashboard - what do you measure and monitor to tell you that you're on track?)
Chart or list of board officers and committee structure
List of current board members with affiliations
Any existing board policies (if not in other documents)
Program





Descriptive information about programs and services
Program evaluation or satisfaction survey reports (executive summary only if available)
Logic model or theory of change if you have one
Summary program activity, audience/ constituent analysis, membership, numbers served
Analysis of audience/program participants, if available
Financial
 Independent audits from the last five completed fiscal years with management letters
 Internal year-end documents: (1) profit and loss statements (note: this does not mean full general ledger reports), (2)
balance sheets (or statements of net assets), and (3) cash flow statements, for the last three years.
 Reports showing performance against budget for the current year and the prior three years and any corrective actions
made during each covered year
 For the current year: year-to-date internal financial statements (profit and loss, balance sheet and cash flow statements)
 Any budget and cash flow projections for future years
 The chart of accounts used in your accounting system (or a summarized chart as appropriate).
 Any financial policies covering items such as investments, internal financial controls, etc.
Development and Marketing




Actual fundraising results for the past two years, by funder
History of government funding streams
A sampling of no more than 10 pieces of promotional and fund-raising materials for the last three years.
Any relevant analysis or interpretation from the past three years of capital, marketing, and fund-raising activities such as
statements of returns on marketing or fund-raising expenses, building and campaign feasibility studies, or reports on
results. (summaries are okay)
Fieldstone Alliance
10/03/07
Page 20 of 31
Attachment D
RATING SYSTEM
The rating system assigns a whole number grading, from a low of 1 to a high of 5, to each of the
indicators of organizational effectiveness in the Instrument. The system is based on assessing two
different components: documentation and information gained through site visits, surveys, and other
means. The documentation rating considers whether the organization possesses appropriate
documents, what analysis of the documents reveals about the organization’s attributes, and whether
organizational processes and capacities meet organizational needs. The site visit, focus group, and
survey rating considers what organizational members have described as historical or typical
performance or processes in the organization, and whether those organizational behaviors and
processes meet organizational needs. The following descriptions of the values associated with each
grading are used to assist in rating decisions.
In relation to submitted documentation:
not evident
1
weak
2
satisfactory
3
strong
4
outstanding
Not evident
none of the relevant documents is available and there is no evidence of organizational
achievement in this area
Weak
some but not all the relevant documents exist in forms that are adequate for their
function and analysis reveals weak organizational performance in this area
Satisfactory
all relevant documents exist in forms that are adequate for their function and analysis
reveals satisfactory organizational performance in this area
Strong
additional related materials have been purposefully developed and analysis reveals
high levels of organizational performance in this area
5
Outstanding particularly intelligent and well-organized additional related materials and analysis
reveals outstanding levels of organizational achievement.
Fieldstone Alliance
10/03/07
Page 21 of 31
In relation to site visit interviews, focus groups, and survey responses:
not evident
1
weak
2
satisfactory
3
strong
4
outstanding
5
Not evident
there is no evidence that the process or product meets the organization’s current needs at
all
Weak
the process or product is insufficient to meet the organization’s current needs
Satisfactory
the process or product meets the organization's current needs
Strong
the process or product is well developed, beyond the organization's current needs, in
ways that appropriately reflect planned/anticipated needs
Outstanding the process or product is extremely well developed, beyond the organization's current
needs, in ways that are exemplary to the field.
Fieldstone Alliance
10/03/07
Page 22 of 31
Attachment E
YOUR ORGANIZATION’S RATINGS
A. Mission, Vision, and Strategy
Rating
1.
Does the organization have clear and agreed-on mission, vision, and values statements that
reflect its purpose, direction, and principles?
3
2.
Is there evidence that board, staff, and constituents know and understand the mission and
vision?
3
3.
Does the organization fill a distinctive and needed niche in the environment within which it
operates, whether that niche is based on quality, geography, culture, market demand, or other
factors?
4
4.
Does the organization have a current strategic plan or strategy document that clearly describes
the organization’s future goals and measurable objectives to achieve the mission?
2
5.
Is there evidence of broad and effective participation by board, staff, stakeholders, volunteers,
and constituents as appropriate in strategic planning, including processes for developing and
reviewing mission, values, and vision?
2
6.
Does the strategic plan indicate that the organization has assessed its past performance,
impacts on constituencies, operating environment, and organizational capabilities as part of
their strategic planning process?
2
7.
Does the organization use their plan on a regular basis to guide their actions (implementation
plan with realistic tasks, timelines, and responsibilities; regular monitoring of progress on the
plan)?
2
8.
Is there evidence that the organization regularly pursues learning and innovation to keep their
strategic approaches up-to-date and relevant?
4
A. Mission, Vision, and Strategy
Fieldstone Alliance
10/03/07
Total Rating
22
Page 23 of 31
B. Governance and Leadership
Rating
9.
Does the board exhibit appropriate leadership to pursue its agreed upon direction, address
needs and challenges, and implement decisions?
3
10. Does the board monitor organizational performance against strategic and annual objectives and
take appropriate action as needed?
3
11. Are the structure and processes of the board (by-laws, composition, role, committees, training,
monitoring of board performance) effective in relation to the organization’s purposes and
needs?
2
12. Does the board manage, appraise and motivate the executive leadership?
3
13. Does the board engage in periodic succession planning for both board members and senior
staff leadership?
2
14. Does the senior leadership of the organization (executive director, senior management) provide
strong vision, direction, and accountability for the organization?
4
15. Does the senior leadership of the organization ensure that the size, structure, and training of
staff and volunteers is appropriate to accomplish the organization’s aims and commitments?
3
16. Does the organization demonstrate awareness of its culture and act in a way that supports a
positive culture for employees?
3
17. Is there evidence of effective decision-making processes throughout the organization?
2
18. Does the organization have systems, strategies and/or processes for initiating and managing
internal and external transitions/change in a timely and appropriate fashion?
2
B. Governance and Leadership
27
Fieldstone Alliance
10/03/07
Total Rating
Page 24 of 31
C. Program Delivery and Impact
Rating
19. Is there evidence that the organization’s program choices display a coherent programming
philosophy or theory of change that is continually informed by mission, vision, and values?
2
20. Is the organization clear regarding program goals and desired impact on constituents?
3
21. Is the organization able to articulate what organizational or program change(s) would most
contribute to greater mission impact?
4
22. Is there evidence that the organization gathers information about its constituents and uses that
information to inform programming decisions?
3
23. Is there evidence of appropriate trends in commitment and support for the organization
(revenue, activity levels, volunteers, donors, membership, contributions)?
3
24. Is there evidence that the organization conducts adequate evaluations of program quality and
impact and uses that information to make programming decisions?
3
25. Does the organization keep up-to-date on their environment, including competitors, allies, and
promising practices in its field, and does it use this information to make programming
decisions?
4
26. Does the organization allocate resources appropriately in relation to program goals and impact,
monitor program performance against budget projections, and use this information to make
program decisions?
3
C. Program Delivery and Impact
25
Fieldstone Alliance
10/03/07
Total Rating
Page 25 of 31
D. Strategic Relationships
Rating
33. Does the organization actively consider or engage in strategic alliances and partnerships to
advance their goals and expand their influence?
4
34. Is there evidence that the organization contributes to the broader community, e.g. involvement
in local forums, public policy work, sharing of resources?
4
35. Has the organization achieved a level of visibility and credibility in its community so that it is
well-known and respected?
4
36. Does the organization periodically evaluate restructuring options (such as collaborations,
mergers, contracting-out, creating for-profit subsidiaries, and partnerships) that might increase
impact and cost-effectiveness?
3
37. Does the organization regularly gather feedback from various stakeholders (funders, other
nonprofits) and use this information to inform organizational decisions?
3
38. Are the organization’s communication and marketing strategies aligned with the mission and
target audience in style and content (e.g. brochures, web site, and media coverage)?
3
D. Strategic Relationships
21
Fieldstone Alliance
10/03/07
Total Rating
Page 26 of 31
E. Finance
Rating
39. Does the organization exhibit overall financial health?
2
40. Is there evidence of appropriate and effective financial decision-making processes, including
the ability to respond to financial opportunities and challenges?
3
41. Does the board provide effective oversight of the organization’s assets and financial condition,
including review and approval of financial statements and audits?
2
42. Does the organization’s chief executive take responsibility for the organization’s financial
situation, and does he/she consider the financial implications of each activity undertaken by the
organization?
4
43. Does the organization maintain a budget that is aligned with its financial goals, and are
processes in place for periodic review of the budget and amendments as necessary?
3
44. If the organization relies on donations or grants for a portion of its revenues, does it have a
realistic fund development plan that is periodically reviewed to measure whether the
fundraising goals are being met?
2
45. Has the organization developed an appropriate revenue base to help ensure revenue
predictability, and does it periodically evaluate alternative revenue sources?
2
46. Is the organization’s balance sheet healthy and appropriately leveraged?
3
47. Is the organization’s financial information accurate, sufficient, and appropriately available to
the board, staff, and funders?
3
E. Finance
24
Fieldstone Alliance
10/03/07
Total Rating
Page 27 of 31
F. Internal Operations
Rating
48. Does the organization have written financial policies and procedures (financial controls,
segregation of duties, conflict of interest) and do these appear to be routinely followed?
2
49. Does the organization show evidence that it has the technological capacity and training it needs
to advance its mission, manage data effectively, communicate efficiently, and reduce costs?
2
50. Does the organization appropriately track program and operational data and use that
information in decision making?
3
51. Is there evidence that the organization has human resource policies and practices that are
evaluated for fairness, periodically updated, and consistently and fairly administered (e.g.
compensation, benefits, appraisal, development)?
2
52. Does the organization show evidence of effective acquisition, maintenance and utilization of its
facilities and equipment?
3
53. Is there evidence that the organization periodically evaluates the adequacy of risk management
practices, e.g. insurance, criminal background checks, records confidentiality, emergency
procedures?
3
F. Internal Operations
Fieldstone Alliance
10/03/07
Total Rating
15
Page 28 of 31
Component of
Organizational
Capacity
Number of
Indicators
Total
Section
Rating
Average
Indicator
Rating
Mission, Vision, and
Strategy
8
22
2.8
Governance and
Leadership
10
27
2.7
Program Delivery and
Impact
8
25
3.1
Strategic Relationships
and Communications
6
21
3.5
Finance
9
24
2.7
Internal Operations
6
15
2.5
47
134
2.9
Overall Rating
Fieldstone Alliance
10/03/07
Page 29 of 31
Attachment F
New Mexico Acequia Association
Stabilization Plan Framework
October 4, 2007
Stabilization Plan
Purpose
Begin the due diligence process toward the dual goals of:


Addressing the most pressing, short-term staffing improvements
Providing the basis for an outline of a funding proposal to support capacity building and
implementation of the stabilization plan
Elements
1. Definition of roles and responsibilities
a. Understand who is currently doing what work; what is not getting done
b. Understand the time, demands, and skills needed for all responsibilities
c. Consider the authority that goes with those responsibilities
d. Priority of changes: which position, which role, timing, funding
2. Communication
a. Define what we mean by communication
b. Consider mutual communication between staff, board, Paula
c. Purpose – to what end? Sharing NMAA’s overall direction
d. Shared decision-making vs. communicating on day-to-day tasks
e. Levels of communication and of detail
3. Database
a. Who has access to, for what purpose
b. Priority needs, such as for membership contacts
c. Training needed
d. Timeline – must be updated before annual meeting
4. Finance
a. Roles and tasks as they are currently
b. Roles and tasks as they could be
c. Budget implications of any staff changes; available funding
d. Auditor review?
5. Other immediate factors
a. Location: pending change in Santa Fe location, Mora
b. Other immediate factors that arise
Action steps
A. Confer with Paula on the framework and action steps; reach agreement
B. Confer with staff on the framework and action steps; gain buy-in
C. Jutta to conduct staff interviews as part of due diligence over two week period; interviews to
include contractors (including board members)
D. Sandy and Jutta to confer on preliminary analysis and next steps
E. Present preliminary analysis and recommended next steps to Paula for consideration
Timeline
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
Develop stabilizing
plan
Stabilizing plan
Annual meeting prep.
Annual meeting
Annual meeting prep.
Prioritize current
programs and services
CB funder discussions
Concilio meeting –
present stabil. plan
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
Legislative session
1/15 →
Legislative session →
2/15
Strategic planning
prep.
Strategic planning
continuing
New admin/operation
staff (Jan → April)
Planting (board)
May 2008
June 2008
Conclude strategic
planning
Additional staff →
Fieldstone Alliance
10/03/07
July 2008
August 2008
Page 31 of 31