Get documents about "2b
Shared by: huanghengdong
-
Stats
- views:
- 12
- posted:
- 12/13/2011
- language:
- English
- pages:
- 65
Document Sample
State Council
2010 Benchmark Survey (Wave 4)
Summary of Results
Prepared by Glenn Lortie
Market Research Manager
June 23, 2011
About the Benchmark Survey
• The Benchmark Survey is a biennial (every two year) study
• It is designed to provide state leaders with information so
they can measure their organization against their peers
• The Benchmark Survey initiative was first undertaken in
2005 (Wave 1); It has been repeated in 2006 (Wave 2),
2008 (Wave 3), and now in 2010 (Wave 4) with data being
collected from December 3rd (2010) through May 5th (2011)
• For leader convenience and to facilitate processing, the
Benchmark Survey questionnaire was “folded into” the
Annual Report filing beginning in 2008
• This summary of results is based on input received from 50
state leaders (for their State Council organizations)
– It does NOT include any Local Chapter data
2
Confidential and proprietary - for the exclusive use of the Emergency Nurses Association
Benchmark Survey Items Slides
State Council Composition - (2-tier / 3-tier structure) Utilization of SIGs . . . 4–6
Committees / Work Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 – 10
Government Affairs and Legislative / Advocacy Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 – 16
Education and Education-related Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 – 27
Member Recruitment and Retention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 – 31
Member Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 – 38
Officers and Terms of Office; Board of Directors; Code of Ethics;
Whistleblower Protection; Casting Votes – State Elections . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 – 45
General Assembly – Delegate selection; Delegate requirements; Delegate
expenses; Reimbursement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 – 51
Corporate Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 – 57
Exhibiting at Other Conferences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 – 61
Other items – Financial Support (for members to conduct research) and
Web sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 – 64
3
Confidential and proprietary - for the exclusive use of the Emergency Nurses Association
State Council Composition -
(2-tier / 3-tier structure)
Utilization of SIGs
4
Compared to five years ago, there
are fewer three-tier organizations
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
53% 66% NA
5
One-in-four two-tier organizations utilize Special Interest
Groups; Most often only one SIG; Usually in bylaws
Number of SIGs
One Two Seven
4
1 state 1 state
states
Identified in the bylaws
as a constituent level?
Yes No
5
1 state
states
BASE: Two-tier states that utilize SIGs like chapters
6
Committees / Work Groups
7
Although many states have five or six active
committees / work groups, one-in-four have
10 or more; Median number is unchanged
↑
Three-tier states are more likely to have 10 or more
groups than are two-tier organizations (36% vs. 17%)
← Median number unchanged from 2008
8
Four-in-five have government relations,
education and injury prevention committees
Q.: Which of the following committees 2010 2008 2006 2005
do you have? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
Government Relations 42 (84 %) 80 % 79 % 79 %
Education 39 (78 %) 83 % 86 % 72 %
Injury Prevention 39 (78 %) 72 % 88 % 93 %
Membership 38 (76 %) 67 % 76 % 72 %
General Assembly / Delegation 25 (50 %) 33 % 48 % 46 %
Trauma 25 (50 %) 57 % 79 % 79 %
Pediatrics 24 (48 %) 52 % 74 % 75 %
Three-tier states are more → Nominations / Elections 19 (38 %) 39 % 40 % 46 %
likely to have a Nominations /
Awards 17 (34 %) 26 % 33 % 32 %
Elections committee than are
two-tier states (52% vs. 25%) Nursing Practice 14 (28 %) 30 % 40 % 29 %
Trauma and Pediatrics (combined) 13 (26 %) 35 % 36 % 25 %
Finance 12 (24 %) 17 % 24 % 11 %
Fundraising 12 (24 %) NA NA NA
Research 4 (8 %) 7% 10 % 7%
Governance 2 (4 %) 0% 12 % 15 %
(Other, please specify) 17 (34 %) 35 % NA NA
9
Most states have now combined injury
prevention into a state version of IQSIP
10
NOTE: This question is new; No previous data
Government Affairs and
Legislative / Advocacy
Activities
11
Nearly all have a designated
Government Affairs chair
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
91% 86% 89%
12
The number of organizations with a specific public
policy agenda has grown (from 1 to 10); Among those
with a specific agenda, most update on a yearly basis
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
↓
2% 14% 0%
13
One-in-three State Councils consider their
organizations very active in legislative issues
Q.: How active is your organization in each of the following ...?
(NOTE: This question is from the Annual Report.)
Very active Somewhat Not too Not at all
active active active
Member education 58 % 32 % 10 % 0%
(2009 / 2008 percentages →) 58 % / 43 % 34 % / 45 % 8 % / 13 % 0%/0%
Member communication 54 % 46 % 0% 0%
40 % / 40 % 56 % / 51 % 4%/9% 0%/0%
Member recruitment 47 % 35 % 18 % 0%
30 % / 22 % 54 % / 54 % 16 % / 24 % 0%/0%
Legislative issues 36 % 42 % 18 % 4%
30 % / 17 % 36 % / 51 % 32 % / 26 % 2%/6%
Nursing practice issues 24 % 50 % 26 % 0%
18 % / 15 % 46 % / 40 % 34 % / 40 % 2%/4%
Injury prevention 16 % 52 % 24 % 8%
28 % / 21 % 48 % / 40 % 16 % / 32 % 8%/6%
Research 0% 14 % 42 % 44 %
8%/4% 8%/9% 40 % / 30 % 44 % / 57 %
14
2009 / 2008 percentages are italicized 2006: NA 2005: NA
A majority cultivate relationships with regulatory or
legislative branch officials and had at least one
legislative visit day, but few have advocacy training
2010 2008 2006 2005
Do you actively cultivate relationships 29 (58 %) 60 % 52 % 48 %
with specific regulatory and / or
legislative branch officials? (% - YES)
Did you organize at least one legislative 28 (56 %) ↑ 23 % 24 % 11 %
visit day in 2010 for members to meet
with legislators and/or state regulators?
(% - YES)
Did you conduct training on effective 11 (22 %) 13 % 19 % 0%
advocacy during one or more meetings
in 2010? (% - YES)
15
Majority of State Councils team with other
organizations on their advocacy objectives
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
43% 40% 29%
16
Education and
Education-related Activities
17
Majority of State Councils consider their
organizations very active in member education
Q.: How active is your organization in each of the following ...?
(NOTE: This question is from the Annual Report.)
Very active Somewhat Not too Not at all
active active active
Member education 58 % 32 % 10 % 0%
(2009 / 2008 percentages →) 58 % / 43 % 34 % / 45 % 8 % / 13 % 0%/0%
Member communication 54 % 46 % 0% 0%
40 % / 40 % 56 % / 51 % 4%/9% 0%/0%
Member recruitment 47 % 35 % 18 % 0%
30 % / 22 % 54 % / 54 % 16 % / 24 % 0%/0%
Legislative issues 36 % 42 % 18 % 4%
30 % / 17 % 36 % / 51 % 32 % / 26 % 2%/6%
Nursing practice issues 24 % 50 % 26 % 0%
18 % / 15 % 46 % / 40 % 34 % / 40 % 2%/4%
Injury prevention 16 % 52 % 24 % 8%
28 % / 21 % 48 % / 40 % 16 % / 32 % 8%/6%
Research 0% 14 % 42 % 44 %
8%/4% 8%/9% 40 % / 30 % 44 % / 57 %
18
2009 / 2008 percentages are italicized 2006: NA 2005: NA
Nearly three-in-four hold an annual
educational symposium
Previous Data
2009 2008 2006 2005
72% 85% 81% 82%
(NOTE: This question is from the Annual Report.) 19
Although most states held only one,
some held multiple symposiums in 2010
BASE: Those states facilitating an educational symposium
20
Nearly two-in-three indicate their largest
educational symposium made money
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
58% 50% NA
21
Wide range in symposium attendance;
Largest 2010 events averaged ~ 115
Q.: What was the number of attendees at your largest (2010) educational symposium?
Range (Low – High) Median
15 to 690 115
2008 Range (Low – High)
15 to 1,400 members
Median 135 members
2006: NA
2005: NA
22
Wide range in symposium exhibitors;
Largest 2010 events averaged ~ 10
Q.: What was the number of exhibitors at your largest (2010) educational symposium?
Range (Low – High) Median
1 to 82 exhibitors 10 exhibitors
2008: Range 0 to 70; Median: 14
2006: Range 0 to 74; Median: 3
2005: Range 0 to 110; Median: 16
23
Also range of Contact Hours; On
average, attendees earn 7-8 hours
Q.: How many Contact Hours could attendees earn at your largest (2010) educational
symposium?
Range (Low – High) Median
0 to 23 hours 7-8 hours
2008: Range 5 to 30; Median: 8
2006: Range 5 to 35; Median: 8
2005: Range 3 to 300; Median: 7
24
Registration fees were varied; On
average, members paid ~ $95
Q.: What were the registration fees for your largest (2010) educational symposium? (Members)
Range (Low – High) Median
$0 to $350 $95
2008: Range $40 to $350; Median: $125
2006: Range $5 to $295; Median: $89
2005: NA
25
On average, symposium fee was
$25 more for non-members …
Q.: What were the registration fees for your largest (2010) educational symposium?
(Dollar difference between Member fee and Non-member fee)
Range (Low – High) Median
$0 to $75 $25
difference difference
2008: Range $0 to $96; Median: $25
2006: NA
2005: NA
26
TNCC most frequently offered
(state-sponsored) course
Q.: How many state-sponsored courses did your organization facilitate in 2010?
TNCC Range (Low – High) Median
0 to 70 courses 3 courses
ENPC Range (Low – High) Median
0 to 39 courses 2 course
CEN Review Range (Low – High) Median
0 to 4 courses 0 courses
CATN Range (Low – High) Median
0 to 2 courses 0 courses
TNCC ENPC CEN Review
2008: Range 0 to 29; Median: 2 2008: Range 0 to 21; Median: 1 2008: Range 0 to 5; Median: 0
2006: Range 0 to 141; Median: 1 2006: Range 0 to 54; Median: 1 2006: Range 0 to 2; Median: 0
2005: Range 0 to 60; Median: 2 2005: Range 0 to 20; Median: 1 2005: Range 0 to 4; Median: 0
CATN
2008: Range 0 to 2; Median: 0 27
2006: NA 2005: NA
Member Recruitment and
Retention
28
Nearly half of State Councils consider their
organizations to be very active in recruitment
Q.: How active is your organization in each of the following ...?
(NOTE: This question is from the Annual Report.)
Very active Somewhat Not too Not at all
active active active
Member education 58 % 32 % 10 % 0%
(2009 / 2008 percentages →) 58 % / 43 % 34 % / 45 % 8 % / 13 % 0%/0%
Member communication 54 % 46 % 0% 0%
40 % / 40 % 56 % / 51 % 4%/9% 0%/0%
Member recruitment 47 % 35 % 18 % 0%
30 % / 22 % 54 % / 54 % 16 % / 24 % 0%/0%
Legislative issues 36 % 42 % 18 % 4%
30 % / 17 % 36 % / 51 % 32 % / 26 % 2%/6%
Nursing practice issues 24 % 50 % 26 % 0%
18 % / 15 % 46 % / 40 % 34 % / 40 % 2%/4%
Injury prevention 16 % 52 % 24 % 8%
28 % / 21 % 48 % / 40 % 16 % / 32 % 8%/6%
Research 0% 14 % 42 % 44 %
8%/4% 8%/9% 40 % / 30 % 44 % / 57 %
29
2009 / 2008 percentages are italicized 2006: NA 2005: NA
A majority of State Councils are now using multiple
methods to target / recruit new members
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
E-mail / direct mail
previously combined
58% 74% 64%
64% 67% 41%
62% 74% 62%
E-mail / direct mail
previously combined
29% NA NA
7% 12% 3%
30
E-mail and direct mail are often employed to retain
members; One-in-three State Councils utilize incentive
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
E-mail / direct mail
previously combined
E-mail / direct mail
previously combined
34% 36% 21%
9% 12% 10%
20% NA NA
31
Member Meetings
32
Most states held 4 to 6 general membership meetings
in 2010; Many plan the same number for 2011
Q.: In total, how many General Membership meetings did your organization have in 2010?
How many are planned for 2011? (NOTE: This question is from the Annual Report.)
Range (Low – High) Median
Number of meetings held in 2010 0 to 14 5
Number of meetings planned for 2011 0 to 16 5
2009: Range 1 to 11; Median: 4
2008: Range 0 to 11; Median: 4
2006: Range 1 to 45; Median: 5
2005: Range 1 to 11; Median: 4
Ten states will increase number of meetings 33
(2010 to 2011); Five will decrease
Meetings typically last 2 to 4 hours
2008: Range 1 to 7; Median: 3
2006: Range 1 to 8; Median: 3
2005: Range 1 to 8; Median: 3
34
While attendance varies, meetings
usually attract ~ 20 members
Q.: On average, how many members attend a general membership meeting?
Range (Low – High) Median
6 to 70 members 20 members
2008: Range 5 to 75; Median: 20
2006: Range 4 to 50; Median: 20
2005: Range 4 to 40; Median: 16
35
More than half of the State Councils rotate
their meetings to different cities
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
54% 60% 66%
36
Half of the State Councils offer meeting
access by phone; Fewer videoconference
Q.: Do you offer an opportunity for members to participate via ... ?
Yes PREVIOUS DATA
Telephone 51 %
2008 2006 2005
46% 10% 14%
Videoconferencing 22 %
2008 2006 2005
12% 5% 0%
37
One-in-four State Councils periodically
facilitate joint meetings with other
organizations (e.g., ACEP or AACN)
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
15% 14% 4%
38
Officers and Terms of Office
Board of Directors
Code of Ethics
Whistleblower Protection
Casting Votes – State Elections
39
Few have Treasurer- and Secretary-elect
positions or combined Secretary / Treasurer
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
100% 100% 100%
100% 100% 100%
91% 86% 86%
94% 86% 86%
81% 76% 72%
55% 46% NA
17% NA NA
NA NA NA
13% 17% 15%
40
When present, President-elect and Past
Presidents usually have one year terms;
Treasurers often have two year terms
What is the term of office (in years) for each position identified in your bylaws?
1 year 2 years 3 years (no stated term)
President 27 (54 %) 23 (46 %) 0 (0 %) 0 (0 %)
President Elect 36 (72 %) 14 (28 %) 0 (0 %) 0 (0 %)
Past President 33 (70 %) 13 (28 %) 1 (2 %) 0 (0 %)
Secretary 22 (45 %) 26 (53 %) 0 (0 %) 1 (2 %)
Secretary Elect 7 (64 %) 2 (18 %) 0 (0 %) 2 (18 %)
Treasurer 17 (36 %) 29 (62 %) 0 (0 %) 1 (2 %)
Treasurer Elect 12 (71 %) 4 (24 %) 0 (0 %) 1 (6 %)
Secretary / Treasurer 1 (14 %) 5 (71 %) 0 (0 %) 1 (14 %)
(combined)
Board of Directors 12 (40 %) 13 (43 %) 0 (0 %) 5 (17 %)
(positions other than
above)
41
Most frequently, states have 5 Board members;
Seven state councils have 10 or more
2008: 5 (median) 2006: 6 (median) 2005: 5 (median) 42
Half of the State Councils now have a
conflict of interest policy applicable to Board;
Fewer have a code of ethics
Q.: Does your organization have … ?
Yes PREVIOUS DATA
(% - YES)
a code of ethics 36 %
applicable to Board 2008 2006 2005
members? 20% 14% 11%
a conflict of interest 51 %
policy applicable to 2008 2006 2005
Board members? 28% 5% 11%
43
Nearly half of State Councils now have a
document retention policy; Although up
(from one in 2008) few have whistleblower
Q.: Does your organization have … ?
Yes PREVIOUS DATA
(% - YES)
in place a policy relative 18 %
to whistleblower 2008 2006 2005
protection? 2% 0% 0%
in place a policy relative 48 %
to document retention? 2008 2006 2005
23% 14% 21%
44
There has been no change in how
members cast votes in state elections
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
38% NA NA
36% NA NA
18% NA NA
9% NA NA
45
General Assembly –
Delegate selection
Delegate requirements
Delegate expenses
Reimbursement
46
Point system remains most frequently used
technique for General Assembly delegate selection
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
79% 79% 83%
28% 33% 41%
11% 40% 31%
6% 24% 26%
4% 7% 10%
4% 5% 0%
13% 14% 7%
47
Meeting / event attendance a frequent requirement
to serve as a General Assembly delegate
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
4% 5% 11%
62% 62% 50%
11% 17% 18%
17% 21% 14%
43% NA NA
48
Majority of State Councils require delegate training
either by National HQ and / or within own state
prior to serving as General Assembly delegate
49
NOTE: This question is new; No previous data
Two-thirds of State Councils pay majority or all
of GA delegate transportation and lodging
expenses; Nearly one-in-three don’t cover meals
What proportion of the following General Assembly delegate expenses are picked up by
your state organization?(NOTE: This is for an "average" delegate – officers and other
individuals may receive higher levels of support.)
100% - state pays State pays State pays State pays 0% - state does NOT
(reimburses) for (reimburses) for (reimburses) for (reimburses) for pay (reimburse) for
everything majority but not all half the costs and less than half but anything
costs delegate covers half covers some of the
cost
Transportation 10 (20 %) 24 (48 %) 5 (10 %) 9 (18 %) 2 (4 %)
2008: All – 28% Partial – 68% None – 4%;
2006: All – 24% Partial – 71% None – 5%;
2005: All – 26% Partial – 70% None – 4%
Lodging 4 (8 %) 28 (57 %) 5 (10 %) 11 (22 %) 1 (2 %)
2008: All – 23% Partial – 70% None – 6%;
2006: All – 17% Partial – 81% None – 2%;
2005: All – 29% Partial – 71% None – 0%
Meals 3 (7 %) 18 (39 %) 3 (7 %) 8 (17 %) 14 (30 %)
2008: All – 7% Partial – 59% None – 36%;
2006: All – 7% Partial – 67% None – 26%;
2005: All – 15% Partial – 63% None – 22%
50
Two-in-three reimburse for out-of-pocket
expenses based on receipts (vs. a per diem)
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
74% 90% 97%
Among the 15 that provided an answer, the
most frequent per diem was $75 →
(There was no officer vs. non-officer difference)
51
Corporate Support
52
One-in-five State Councils cultivate a
target list of corporate sponsors
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
23% 36% 30%
53
Educational sessions / symposiums most
frequently (corporate) supported events
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
5% 10% 23%
7% 19% 30%
2% 2% 7%
0% 0% 4%
21% 36% 24%
44% 67% 74%
5% 2% 8%
44% NA NA
NOTE: Question wording slightly different in 2006 / 2005: Have you been successful in 54
obtaining corporate support for the following during (2006 / 2005)?
Among the states receiving support, the median
number of corporations providing support was 5
Q.: How many corporations provided support to your state during 2010?
(Numbers below are based on those states receiving support.)
2008: Range 1 to 42; Median 5 Range (Low – High) Median
2006: ? (not clear) 1 to 39 5
2005: ? (not clear)
← Only three states (Louisiana, Vermont,
and New York) had more than a handful
of corporate supporters
55
Only three State Council organizations
applied for grants last year (2010)
Q: How many applications for grants did your
state organization make in 2010?
From government entities - Three states applied:
• One state had two applications; Two state councils had
one application each
From foundations - No states had applied
2008 (government): Five states applied (one application from each)
2008 (foundations): Three states applied (one state had two applications; Two
state councils had one application each)
In 2006 and 2005, number grants was not split out – government / foundation
2006: Range 0 to 2; Median: 0;
2005: Range 0 to 2; Median: 0
56
Two of the State Council organizations
received $20,000+ from government entities
Q: What was the dollar value of grants your
state council received during 2010?
From government entities -
• One state $22,000; Another state $20,000
From foundations – No states received grants
2008 (government): Three states received a total of $20,000 (each); One state
$5,000; Another state $750
2008 (foundations): One state received a total of $15,000; One state $5,000;
Another state $1,500
In 2006 and 2005, number grants was not split out – government / foundation
2006: Range $0 to $20,000; Median: $5,500;
2005: Range $0 to $15,000; Median: $2,000
57
Exhibiting at Other Conferences
58
Three-in-ten exhibited at conferences of
other organizations and associations
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
30% 51% NA
59
Among the 15 State Councils that had exhibited at other organization / association
conferences, most (ten states) had exhibited only once or twice in 2010;
Few seemed to express the cost on a per square foot basis, likely per event
60
Impact of exhibiting (on member recruitment)
has been “minor” for most State Councils
2008: 7 of 14 states felt it had a minor 61
impact on member recruitment
Other items –
Financial Support (for members to
conduct research)
Web sites
62
Only two State Councils provided financial
support to their members for research
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
6% 3% NA
Among those that
provided support,
only one indicated
the amount: $300
2008 totals:
1 - $1,200
1 - $1,000
1 - $500
63
Nearly all the State Councils now have
their own Web site
Previous Data
2008 2006 2005
89% 82% 89%
64
If you have questions, contact:
Kari Zick (Component Relations)
or Glenn Lortie (Marketing)
at ENA’s National Office
