Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

#Rb21NM The Nuts & Bolts of Collective Impact Jennifer Splansky Juster Director, Collective Impact Forum, FSG Merita Irby Chief Operating Office, the Forum.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "#Rb21NM The Nuts & Bolts of Collective Impact Jennifer Splansky Juster Director, Collective Impact Forum, FSG Merita Irby Chief Operating Office, the Forum."— Presentation transcript:

1 #Rb21NM The Nuts & Bolts of Collective Impact Jennifer Splansky Juster Director, Collective Impact Forum, FSG Merita Irby Chief Operating Office, the Forum for Youth Investment Kelli Parmley Executive Director, Bridging RVA April 22, 2014

2 #Rb21NM Starting with the end in mind... Getting specific about community context The small gear makes a big difference

3 #Rb21NM Partners Co-Catalysts FSG.ORG

4 #Rb21NM Goals of the Collective Impact Forum: To create the knowledge, networks and tools that accelerate the adoption and increase the rigor of collective impact Activities Develop a field-wide digital forum to create and disseminate effective knowledge, tools and practices that support collective impact Support communities of practice, convenings and other events across the country that enable practitioners and funders of collective impact to increase their effectiveness FSG.ORG Co-Catalysts

5 #Rb21NM Agenda Collective Impact Overview Collective Impact Timing and Sequence Collective Impact Structures

6 #Rb21NM There Are Several Types of Problems Source: Adapted from “Getting to Maybe” Simple Complicated Complex Baking a Cake Right “recipe” essential Gives same results every time Sending a Rocket to the Moon “Formulas” needed Experience built over time and can be repeated with success Raising a Child No “right” recipes or protocols Outside factors influence Experience helps, but doesn’t guarantees success The social sector traditionally treats problems as simple or complicated FSG.ORG

7 #Rb21NM Traditional Approaches Are Not Solving Our Most Complex Social Problems Funders select individual grantees Isolated Impact Organizations work separately and compete Corporate and government sectors are often disconnected from foundations and nonprofits Evaluation attempts to isolate a particular organization’s impact Large scale change is assumed to depend on scaling organizations FSG.ORG

8 #Rb21NM Imagine a Different Approach – Multiple Players Working Together to Solve Complex Issues Understand that social problems – and their solutions – arise from interaction of many organizations within larger system Collective Impact Cross-sector alignment with government, nonprofit, philanthropic and corporate sectors as partners Organizations actively coordinating their action and sharing lessons learned All working toward the same goal and measuring the same things FSG.ORG

9 #Rb21NM Collective Impact is the commitment of a group of important actors from different sectors to a common agenda for solving a specific social problem. Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012 FSG.ORG

10 #Rb21NM Five Conditions for Collective Impact Common Agenda Shared Measurement Mutually Reinforcing Activities Continuous Communication Backbone Support FSG.ORG

11 #Rb21NM Differences between Collective Impact and Collaboration Source: Jeff Edmondson, Strive CollaborationCollective Impact Convene around specific programs / initiatives Work together over the long term to move outcomes ProveLearn and improve Addition to what you doIs what you do Advocate for ideasAdvocate for what works Collective impact initiatives also are nearly always cross-sector, whereas collaborations often occur within a single sector FSG.ORG

12 #Rb21NM PAIR & SHARE: Think about initiatives in your community Can you think of one thing that fizzled and one thing that sailed? What made the difference...

13 #Rb21NM Agenda Collective Impact Overview Collective Impact Timelines & Key Steps Collective Impact Structures

14 #Rb21NM Overarching Leadership Ready by 21 Leadership Council * P-20 Council Strive Network * Children’s Cabinet * WIB Population Focused Success By 6 * Thriving Seniors Provider Network Out-of-school Time (OST) Network Issue Coalition Substance Abuse Coalition * Teen Pregnancy Intimate Partner Violence * Child Abuse & Neglect A Collective Impact Approach can be taken by groups operating at different levels in a community Promise Neighborhoods * Neighborhood Association Neighborhood Where is your work?

15 #Rb21NM COLLABORATIONS United Neighborhood Centers Of Greater Roch. Rochester‘s Child Youth 2000 Juvenile Justice Council CCSI TIER II Interagency Council Comm. Asset Network Board of Health Children & Family Serv. Subcomm. School Health Leadership Team RECAP Community Profile Preventive Services Coalition RAEYC Early Childhood Develop I. Homeless Continuum of care Impl. Team Monroe Cty. Sch & Comm. Health Ed. Network Rochester Effectiveness Partnership N.E.T. City Violence Initiative Task Force on Violence Domestic Violence Consortium Perinatal Community Consortium Do Right by Kids campaign Perinatal Substance Abuse Coalition SACSI Counselor’s Consortium Rochester Children’s Collab. Roch. Enterprise Community Zone P. YRBS Group HW & Tutoring Round Table Student Assistance Prof. Adult Services Subcomm. Student Asst. Prof. Greater Roch. Area Transitions Collab. America’s Promise CHANGE Continuous Improvement Service Delivery Advocacy Evaluation Positive Outcomes for Youth & Families Best Practice Community Mobilization CASAS Providers Cross - Systems Change MCTP NBN Not Me Not Now SDFSCA Planning Committees Reclaiming Youth PCIC OASAS Prevention Initiative Community Service Board Reg. 2 Preventive Provid.N Mentoring Round Table Runaway & Homeless Youth Ser Provider Domestic Violence Partnership Health Action Homeless Services Network Youth Services Quality C. Diversion Collaborative

16 #Rb21NM Cascading Levels of Collaboration Cascading Levels of Collaboration & A Range of Possible Roles Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews Shared Measures Steering Committee Steering Committee Backbone Governance, Vision and Strategy Action Planning Execution Public Will Working Groups Partners Community Members Common Agenda BACKBONE ACCOUNTABILITY PARTNER WORKING GROUP LEAD OR MEMBER core team COLLABORATIVE PARTNERS COMMUNICATIONS & ENGAGEMENT PARTNER COMMUNICATIONS & ENGAGEMENT PARTNER DATA PARTNER FSG.ORG

17 Building Civic Infrastructure: The Role and Function of a Backbone Entity

18 Context 28 Member Board (K-12, Higher Education, Business, Government, Philanthropic/Civic) Rotating Education and Business Chairs 9 jurisdictions (subset of Richmond MSA) –8 School Districts 5 College and University Partners 2 critical backbone positions funded positions supported by Virginia Commonwealth University

19 WHY A BACKBONE?

20 We believe that education is the most important engine of individual opportunity and economic growth in our region.

21 Is this Our Civic Infrastructure?

22 Is our engine supporting individual opportunity for everyone?

23 Regional Educational Attainment Source: U.S. Census, American Community Survey 2012, 5-Year Estimates. Populations given are for Working Age adults, ages Population 4,153Population 173,965Population 12,660Population 53,799 Population 169,936Population 10,897Population 16,589Population 108,098

24 Hispanic Educational Attainment by Locality Source: U.S. Census, American Community Survey 2012, 5-Year Estimates.

25 Black or African American Educational Attainment by Locality

26 Is our engine positioned to support economic competitiveness and growth?

27 Projected Degree Gap (2030) Based on Industry Mix : 27,106 Degrees Sources: Weldon Cooper Center; U.S. Census, American Community Survey, 2012; Chmura’ JobsEQ®; BLS Employment Projections. Projections assume that future degree requirements for occupations remain close to current requirements-- higher education requirements for occupations, to replace experience, for example, would create a larger gap. 27,106 Degrees By 2030 Current (45% attainment) Projected Industry Demand (49%)

28 NEED: 55% of Population with at least an Associate’s Degree by 2030 Source: Weldon Cooper Center; U.S. Census, American Community Survey, 2012, Chmura Economics & Analytics (46%) (48%) (52%) (55%) 65,405 Degrees Needed

29 1.Facilitate a shared agenda 2.Support the alignment and coordination of activities 3.Establish shared measurement practices 4.Build public will to take action 5.Advance policy solutions and changes 6.Mobilize resources both human and financial across public and private sectors in support of the agenda How: Six Functions of a Backbone FSG.ORG

30 Build Civic Infrastructure Local Data (Community and focused local trends) Community Voice (Lived expertise) National Research (Summarize and translate) The formal and informal processes and networks through which communities make decisions and attempt to solve problems.

31 Alignment Improving – Collect and analyze data and evidence to improve outcomes Mobilizing – Coordinate the efforts and capitalize on the unique strengths of diverse organizations to help people along the path to college- and career- readiness Focusing – agree upon a common result and action based on shared metrics and evidence

32 Focusing Mobilizing Improving Local Data Research Community Voice --Develop Community and Intermediate Indicators --Research to support indicator selection --Regional Data Advisory Committee --Identify Priorities --Deeper analysis of local data to support strategy development --Identify effective, scalable strategies and performance measures --Focus groups of practitioners and community members --Develop capacity to share data --Improve human capacity to do analysis --Best practice in continuous improvement and evaluation --Leadership engagement for advocacy --Focus groups and quality surveys Regional Goals and Indicators Two Regional Action Networks Identify Human Capital Gaps for Analysis and Results Facilitation Results 3. Shared Measurement 1. Common Agenda; 6. Mobilize Resources 2. Align and Coordinate 4.. Build Public Will; 5.. Policy Solutions/ Changes

33 Action Networks Local Data (Community and focused local trends) Community Voice (Lived expertise) National Research (Summarize and translate) a group of diverse and committed individuals all focused on one specific community indicator to promote and scale what is working Two Components: I.Broad Regional Strategies I.Focused Pilot

34 #Rb21NM Cascading Levels of Collaboration Cascading Levels of Collaboration & A Range of Possible Roles Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews Shared Measures Steering Committee Steering Committee Backbone Governance, Vision and Strategy Action Planning Execution Public Will Working Groups Partners Community Members Common Agenda

35 #Rb21NM Collective Impact Infrastructure: Structuring for Intentionality and Uncertainty * Adapted from Listening to the Stars: The Constellation Model of Collaborative Social Change, by Tonya Surman and Mark Surman, 2008.Listening to the Stars: The Constellation Model of Collaborative Social Change partner-driven action strategic guidance and support = community partner (e.g., nonprofit, funder, business, public agency, resident) Ecosystem of Community Partners Backbone Support (organizations that collectively play backbone function) Steering Committee Work Group Chair Common Agenda and Shared Metrics FSG.ORG

36 #Rb21NM Many Types of Organizations Can Serve as Backbones Types of BackbonesExamples Funders New Nonprofit Existing Nonprofit Government Agency or School District Shared Across Multiple Organizations “Backbone for backbones” FSG.ORG

37 #Rb21NM Backbone Organizations Engage in Six Important Activities 1. Guide vision and strategy 2. Support aligned activities 3. Establish shared measurement 4. Build public will 5. Advance policy 6. Mobilize funding 6 Activities of Backbone Organizations FSG.ORG

38 #Rb21NM Backbone Support Organizations: Diagnostic Do you have the Skills? 6 Activities of Backbone Organizations 1.Guide vision and strategy 2.Support aligned activities 3.Establish shared measurement 4.Build public will 5.Advance policy 6.Mobilize funding Backbone Organization Is it a Fit? 1.Partnership’s vision matches your vision 2.Geographic Scope – similar to Partnership 3.Geographic Levels – neighborhood, city/county state 4.Leadership Levels – respected by grasstops and grassroots 5.Credibility – are you seen as the natural leader in this space? Do you have the bandwidth? 1.Dedicated Staff (with skills) 2.Organizational buy-in 3.Sustainability potential 4.Start-up flexibility – willingness to serve in interim or time limited role

39 #Rb21NM Backbone Diagnostic Are there key partners in your community playing backbone functions? Who is doing what? How do you relate? Individually: Who would you list? Pair: How could you use a backbone diagnostic?

40 #Rb21NM Agenda Collective Impact Overview Collective Impact Timing & Sequence Collective Impact Structures

41 #Rb21NM CI Efforts Tend to Transpire Over Four Phases Phase IV Sustain Action and Impact Components for Success Identify champions and form cross- sector group Create infrastructure (backbone and processes) Convene community stakeholders Facilitate community outreach Engage community and build public will Map the landscape and use data to make case Create common agenda (common goals and strategy) Hold dialogue about issue, community context, and available resources Facilitate community outreach specific to goal Analyze baseline data to ID key issues and gaps Establish shared metrics (indicators, measurement, and approach) Facilitate and refine Continue engagement and conduct advocacy Support implementation (alignment to goal and strategies) Collect, track, and report progress (process to learn and improve) Determine if there is consensus/urgency to move forward Phase III Organize for Impact Phase II Initiate Action Phase I Assess Readiness, Facilitate Dialogue GovernanceandInfrastructure StrategicPlanning CommunityInvolvement EvaluationAndImprovement FSG.ORG

42 #Rb21NM Timing for Each Phase Varies by Initiative The implementation time taken for collective impact efforts is determined by the local context of each initiative May 2010 – Dec 2010 (7 months) Sept 2010 – Feb 2011 (5 months) Jan 2011 – Dec 2011 (12 months) Jan 2012  May 2011-Oct 2011 (5 months) Initiative Feb 2011 – Nov 2011 (9 months) Nov 2011 – May 2012 (7 months) Nov 2011  June 2012  Source: FSG Interviews and Analysis Phase III Sustain Action & Impact Phase III Organize for Impact Phase II Initiate Action Phase IV Sustain Action & Impact FSG.ORG

43 One Framework: “Start Up” to “Systems Change” Exploring (July 2009 – August 2013) Emerging (January 2014) Sustaining (July 2014) Systems Change

44 #Rb21NM Launching a Collective Impact Initiative Has Three Prerequisites Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews and Analysis Financial Resources Committed funding partners Sustained funding for at least 2-3 years Pays for needed infrastructure and planning Influential Champion Commands respect and engages cross-sector leaders Focused on solving problem but allows participants to figure out answers for themselves Urgency for Change Critical problem in the community Frustration with existing approaches Multiple actors calling for change Engaged funders and policy makers ! FSG.ORG

45 #Rb21NM The recurring steps of Community Change Management Take Shape Structural Alignment Take Stock Shared Diagnosis Target Action Mutually Reinforcing Activities Take Aim Goal Alignment Track Progress Shared Measurement A Big Picture Approach to Action Planning & Community Change

46 #Rb21NM The recurring steps of Community Change Management Take Shape Structural Alignment Take Stock Shared Diagnosis Target Action Take Aim Goal Alignment includes for a Track Progress FSG’s Five Conditions Shared Measurement Mutually Reinforcing Activities A Big Picture Approach to Action Planning & Community Change Common Agenda Shared Measurement Mutually Reinforcing Activities Continuous Communication Backbone Support Shared Measurement

47 #Rb21NM The recurring steps of Community Change Management Take Shape Structural Alignment Take Stock Shared Diagnosis Target Action Mutually Reinforcing Activities Take Aim Goal Alignment Track Progress Shared Measurement A Big Picture Approach to Action Planning & Community Change Process & Standards the “nuts & bolts” of collective impact

48 #Rb21NM Standards for... The recurring steps of Community Change Management Take Shape Form Connect Take Stock Assess Analyze Target Action Visualize Align Take Aim Engage Frame Track Progress Track Improve Partnership Structures Backbone Support Organizations Linking to Existing Efforts Engagement Strategy “Big Picture” Frameworks Identifying Needs & Resources Analysis Techniques Selecting Targeted Goals & Indicators Issue Integrated Logic Models Intervention Design & Selection Partnership Evaluation Reflection & Improvement Shared Action & Accountability Communicating Big Goals

49 #Rb21NM Take Shape Take Aim Take Stock Target Action Track Progress Benefits of the Big Picture Approach Adaptable Roadmap Connections between steps Tackle more than one issue at a time Helps to clarify roles Builds on evidence of what works meeting leaders where they are what’s “good enough” to go forward? by looking at “whole person” taking aligned action at different levels of work it can be done!

50 #Rb21NM Take Shape Take Aim Take Stock Target Action Track Progress Overarching Leadership Population Focused Provider Network Issue Coalition Structural Alignment Goal Alignment Shared Diagnosis Mutually Reinforcing Activities Shared Measurement Neighborhood Ready by 21 Leadership Council * P-20 Council Strive Network * Children’s Cabinet Success By 6 * Thriving Seniors Out-of-school Time (OST) Network Substance Abuse Coalition * Teen Pregnancy Intimate Partner Violence * Child Abuse & Neglect Promise Neighborhoods * Neighborhood Association

51 #Rb21NM In Catalyzing Social Change, Collective Impact also Depends on Essential Intangible Elements for its Success Fostering Connections between People Creating a Culture of Learning Relationship and Trust building Leadership Identification and Development Collective Impact’s Intangible Elements Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews FSG.ORG

52 #Rb21NM Stay Connected Presentation materials will be posted at Tweet about your session! #Rb21NM FSG.ORG

53 #Rb21NM HANDOUTS FSG.ORG

54 #Rb21NM There Are Five Conditions to Collective Impact Success Common Agenda Shared Measurement Mutually Reinforcing Activities Continuous Communication Backbone Support All participants have a shared vision for change including a common understanding of the problem and a joint approach to solving it through agreed upon actions Collecting data and measuring results consistently across all participants ensures efforts remain aligned and participants hold each other accountable Participant activities must be differentiated while still being coordinated through a mutually reinforcing plan of action Consistent and open communication is needed across the many players to build trust, assure mutual objectives, and appreciate common motivation Creating and managing collective impact requires dedicated staff and a specific set of skills to serve as the backbone for the entire initiative and coordinate participating organizations and agencies Source: FSG SSIR Collective Impact Article, Winter 2011; FSG Interviews FSG.ORG

55 #Rb21NM Backbones Differ Depending on Local or Issue-Specific Context Types of Backbones DescriptionExamplesProsCons Funder-Based One funder initiates CI strategy as planner, financier, and convener Ability to secure start-up funding and recurring resources Ability to bring others to the table and leverage other funders Lack of broad buy-in if CI effort seen as driven by one funder Lack of perceived neutrality New Nonprofit New entity is created, often by private funding, to serve as backbone Perceived neutrality as facilitator and convener Potential lack of baggage Clarity of focus Lack of sustainable funding stream and potential questions about funding priorities Potential competition with local nonprofits Existing Nonprofit Established nonprofit takes the lead in coordinating CI strategy Credibility, clear ownership, and strong understanding of issue Existing infrastructure in place if properly resourced Potential “baggage” and lack of perceived neutrality Lack of attention if poorly funded Government Government entity, either at local or state level, drives CI effort Public sector “seal of approval” Existing infrastructure in place if properly resourced Bureaucracy may slow progress Public funding may not be dependable Shared Across Multiple Organizations Numerous organizations take ownership of CI wins Lower resource requirements if shared across multiple organizations Broad buy-in, expertise Lack of clear accountability with multiple voices at the table Coordination challenges, leading to potential inefficiencies Backbone across backbones Senior-level committee with ultimate decision- making power Broad buy-in from senior leaders across public, private, and nonprofit sectors Lack of clear accountability with multiple voices FSG.ORG

56 #Rb21NM CI Efforts Tend to Transpire Over Four Phases Phase IV Sustain Action and Impact Components for Success Identify champions and form cross- sector group Create infrastructure (backbone and processes) Convene community stakeholders Facilitate community outreach Engage community and build public will Map the landscape and use data to make case Create common agenda (common goals and strategy) Hold dialogue about issue, community context, and available resources Facilitate community outreach specific to goal Analyze baseline data to ID key issues and gaps Establish shared metrics (indicators, measurement, and approach) Facilitate and refine Continue engagement and conduct advocacy Support implementation (alignment to goal and strategies) Collect, track, and report progress (process to learn and improve) Determine if there is consensus/urgency to move forward Phase III Organize for Impact Phase II Initiate Action Phase I Assess Readiness, Facilitate Dialogue GovernanceandInfrastructure StrategicPlanning CommunityInvolvement EvaluationAndImprovement FSG.ORG

57 #Rb21NM Timing for Each Phase Varies by Initiative The implementation time taken for collective impact efforts is determined by the local context of each initiative May 2010 – Dec 2010 (7 months) Sept 2010 – Feb 2011 (5 months) Jan 2011 – Dec 2011 (12 months) Jan 2012  May 2011-Oct 2011 (5 months) Initiative Feb 2011 – Nov 2011 (9 months) Nov 2011 – May 2012 (7 months) Nov 2011  June 2012  Source: FSG Interviews and Analysis Phase III Sustain Action & Impact Phase III Organize for Impact Phase II Initiate Action Phase IV Sustain Action & Impact FSG.ORG

58 #Rb21NM Appendix FSG.ORG Each Stakeholder and group Plays a Specific Role A Backbone’s Scope and Budget May Grow Over Time, Primarily Reflecting Staff Additions And Available Resources Every Backbone Needs Funding; Backbone Budgets Can Range From Around $400K to Upwards of $800K Selecting a Backbone Is an Important Process that Should Build the Credibility of the Backbone and the Initiative A Strong Steering Committee Is Important for Building the Initiative’s Credibility and for Bringing Other Stakeholders to the Table Steering Committee Members Should Be Carefully Recruited Representative Collective Impact Timeline: The First 18 Months

59 #Rb21NM Each Stakeholder and Group Plays a Specific Role Community partner Stakeholder / GroupDescription and Role Work Group (a.k.a. network, action team) Individual organizations and members of the community (e.g, nonprofit, funder, business, public agency, student, parent, resident) Partners should have access to a variety of opportunities to learn about and engage in the initiative Comprised of cross-sector community partners targeting particular element of common agenda (e.g., early childhood, K12, postsecondary, OST, data, policy, funding) Designs and implements a targeted action plan, involving non-work group members as needed Led by two co-chairs willing to invest time and (ideally) staff capacity Some groups or networks serve slightly different functions, e.g., funders group (to identify opportunities for alignment), or inclusive community network to raise awareness about project and provide mechanism for vetting actions Steering Committee (Strategy Group) Comprised of cross-sector community partners (representative of the large ecosystem) Provides strategic direction for the initiative and champions the work In some cases, committee members are chairs for action teams Backbone Organization Provides dedicated staff Supports the work of partners by assisting with strategic guidance, supporting aligned activity, establishing shared measurement, building public will, advancing policy, and mobilizing funding FSG.ORG

60 #Rb21NM A Backbone’s Scope and Budget May Grow Over Time, Primarily Reflecting Staff Additions And Available Resources * The resources required by the Backbone vary with the needs of the initiatives. In some instances budgets have remained flat or declined; in others, FTEs and budgets have grown with the changing requirements of the role FSG.ORG Source: FSG case work and analysis Estimated Budget: Typical Responsibilities: Guide vision and strategy Liaise with Working Group and Strategy Groups Build public will / awareness Begin implementation of strategies and shared measures Guide vision and strategy Support and coordinate aligned activities Deepen shared measurement practices Build public will / awareness Expand priority strategies and partners based on data Build public will / awareness Communicate progress Advance policy Mobilize funding Potential Staff: 1.Executive Director 2.Data Manager 3.Facilitator 4.Project Coordinator 5.Communications Manager 6.Office Manager / Assistant 1.Executive Director 2.Data Manager 3.Facilitator 4.Project Coordinator 1.Executive Director 2.Data Manager 3.Facilitator Year 1 Year 2* Year 3 On* $3-400K$5-600K$7-900K

61 #Rb21NM Every Backbone Needs Funding; Backbone Budgets Can Range From Around $400K to Upwards of $800K Expense Category Budget ($) Description LowHigh Salaries80, ,000 1 FTE Executive Director 55, ,000 1 FTE Facilitator/Coordinator 65, ,000 1 FTE Data/Operations Manager 25,000 65, FTE Admin. Support Benefits45,000 84,000 At 20% of salaries Professional Fees90, ,000 Consultants, R&E, Recruiting, Data Collection Travel and Meetings7,000 30,000 Workshops, events, retreat Community Engagement0 35,000 Space rental, youth stipends Communications36,500 90,000 Reports, materials design, paid media Technology0 4,900 In kind hardware, software, IT Office0 74,000 In kind/paid rent, utilities, supplies Other0 6,500 Staff training, miscellaneous Total Expenses403,500849,400 Covered by grants and fees Source: Adapted from Strive Network, TYSA, & CCER Illustration of a Backbone’s Budget: FSG.ORG

62 #Rb21NM Selecting a Backbone Is an Important Process that Should Build the Credibility of the Backbone and the Initiative  Conduct landscape scan of key players, including the “usual suspects” and beyond  Build understanding of the role of a backbone among early initiative leaders  Approach high-potential backbone organizations to assess their interest in serving as a backbone  Issue an RFP  Interview applicants  Steering Committee and/or funder(s) selects backbone  An “early backbone” helps guide the initiative from the beginning, including helping to select the Steering Committee  6-12 months after the first SC meeting, a determination is made to either make the early backbone into a permanent backbone, or open the process to other backbones  Based on existing knowledge of key players, backbone is “named,” usually by the initiative’s funders  The backbone helps recruit a Steering Committee, potentially with the help of an early “advisory group” or funders Predetermined Semi-Open Process Open Process Pros: Transparent, builds credibility, open to many organizations with different skill sets Cons: Takes time, must work through potentially difficult decisions Pros: Quick, avoids difficult conversations in the short-term (though may arise in the long-term) Cons: May not have high credibility, may not find the org. with the best skill set, assumes funders know best Pros: Allows for a backbone “try out,” backbone staff available from beginning of initiative Cons: May be politically difficult, and inefficient to switch backbones FSG.ORG

63 #Rb21NM A Strong Steering Committee Is Important for Building the Initiative’s Credibility and for Bringing Other Stakeholders to the Table FSG.ORG

64 #Rb21NM Steering Committee Members Should Be Carefully Recruited 1. Decision Maker. CEO/President Level - Able to drive systems change relevant to effort 2. Representative. Geographic coverage of effort (counties and subregional steering committees) as well as sector 3. Influential Champion. Commands respect of broader set of stakeholders (and perceived so). Can bring stakeholders to the table and keep them there. Can champion the strategy with the broader community 4. Content Expertise/Practitioner. Familiar with subject matter to contribute substantively 5. Passion and Urgency. Passionate about issue and feels real urgency for the need to change 6. Focused on the Greater Interest. Represents need of their own organization but able to think and act in the greater interest of the community 7. Commitment. Willing and able to commit time and energy to attend meetings and get work done Sample Traits FSG.ORG

65 #Rb21NM Representative Collective Impact Timeline: The First 18 Months 0 36 Conduct “landscape and readiness assessment” ID and recruit Steering Committee Develop common agenda Develop initiative-level shared measures Identify and build capacity of backbone organization Create work groups; build their capacity Conduct outreach to key stakeholders (gather input, build understanding, build support) Conduct outreach to key stakeholders, as needed Develop strategy-level shared measures Develop common agenda Initiate Action Organize for Impact Analyze baseline data, understand the problem, “make the case” FSG.ORG Develop shared measurement system


Download ppt "#Rb21NM The Nuts & Bolts of Collective Impact Jennifer Splansky Juster Director, Collective Impact Forum, FSG Merita Irby Chief Operating Office, the Forum."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google