本研究係採參與式模型，藉由文教財團法人執行長（秘書長）的參與及協助，嘗試建立一套適用國內文教財團人之績效指標。按基金來源別，本研究將文教財團法人分為(1)非官方與非特定企業支持之基金會、(2)特定企業支持之基金會二類，以所建構之續效衡量指標來探討上述二類文教財團法人所重視之指標是否存有顯著差異。此外，本研究進一步探討執行長（秘書長）與志工對這些指標的重要性看法是否一致。本研究希望所得之結果能作為文教財團法人本身績效衡量、政府機構審查及茉會大眾捐款時的參考依據。 本研究之結果可分三方面彙總扼要說明如下： 一、平均數與標準差 全體受試者認為較重要的前五項績效指標是：(1)舉辦活動內容與成立宗旨相符。(2)完善的督導制度。(3)健全的財務制度（公開化、透明化）。(4)與社會互動的情況。(5)健全的董監事會。 全體受試者認為較不重要的五項績效指標分別是：(1)舉辦活動的次數（含座談會、公聽會）。(2)平均每服務人次成本。(3)專職人員的離職率。(4)參與基金會活動人次的多寡。(5)專職人員與志工的人數。 二、因素分析 本研究以 Kaiser 洪共萃取出五個因素，分別命名為：(1)因素一：組織結構與制度因素。(2)因素二：內部作業的管理因素。(3)因素三：與外界關係因素。(4)因素四：與外界關係因素。(5)因素五：服務成果因素。 根據平均數與因素分析的結果，本研究建構一套兼具適量性、重要性及涵蓋組織各個層面的績效指標，此績效衡量指標分別是：(1)舉辦的活動內容與成立宗旨相符。(2)服務的內容符合民眾的需求。(3)活動目標達成率。(4)完善的督導制度。(5)完善的檔案管理和工作說明書。(6)健全的財務制度（公開化、透明化）。(7)與社會互動的情況。 三、單因子多變量變異數分析 根據變異數分析的結果，本研究得知基金來源的不同並不會造成執行長（秘書長）對各績效指標的看法有顯著的差異，而執行長（秘書長）與志工對績效指標的看法有九項產生差異，分別是：(1)指標一：舉辦的活動內容與成立宗指相符。(2)指標四：參與基金會活動人次的多寡。(3)指標七：完善的督導制度。(4)指標十三：定期的專職人員與志工培訓計量。(4)指標十六：基金的數額及孳息的多寡。(6)指標十八：與社會互動的情況。(7)指標十九：社會知名（大眾對貴基金會的了解）程度。(8)指標二十：與主管單位密切聯繫的程度。(9)指標二十一：與相關公益團體密切聯繫的程度。 / This research is based on participant observation model. The goal is to set up an appropriate performance standard for domestic non-profit organizations through the participation of the directors. I divide those organizations into two sub groups based on their fund resources. One is non-official and to specific supporter from enterprise, the other is the foundation which has specific enterprise supports. According to the measurements in two different groups to find out if there is any major difference among those organizations. Furthermore, the sample includes the directors of the organizations as well as volunteers in order to test the agreements on performance standards. The objectives of thsi research are to establish an general performance vealuation standard for non-profit organizations. In the meantime, it acts as the measurement of government investigation and public donation. The research results are as follows: 1. Arithmetic mean and standard deviation: The whole interviewees consider the five most important criteria areas follows: (1)Activities are consistent with its mission statement. (2)A sound supervision system (3)A sound financial system (4)Good interaction with society (5)A sound Board of directors The whole interviewees consider the five less important criteria areas follows: (1)The frequency of activities (2) The average human cost per service (3) The turnover rate of porofessionals (4) The amount of people attends the activities (5)The numbers of professionals and volunteers 2.Factor analysis: This research contents five factors by using Kaiser method. (1) factor 1: organizational structures and systems (2)factor 2: internal management system (3)factor 3: public relationship (4)factor 4: service content (5)factor 5: service performance Accordig to the results of arithmetic mean and factor analysis, I construct the indicators incuding the importance and general guidelines of organizations. They are: (1)Activities are consistent with its mission statement. (2) Services can meet people's needs (3)The success rate of activities (4) A sound supervision system (5) A sound file management and job description (6) A sound financial system (7) Good interaction with society 3. One-Way MANOVA According to the results of analysis of variance, there is little correlation between the fund resources and the point of view from directors. However, the differences between directors and volunteers are as the following: (1) Activities are consistent with its mission statement. (2) The amount of people attends the activities (3) A sound supervision system (4) Regular professional and volunteer training programs (5) The amount of funds and interests (6) Good interaction with society (7) Reputation (8) The degree in association with authorities (9) The degree in association with relative organizations