The Nuts & Bolts of Collective Impact

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 Merita

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

Partners Co-Catalysts
FSG.ORG Partners Co-Catalysts Jen

FSG.ORG 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 Co-Catalysts Jen

Agenda Collective Impact Overview Collective Impact Structures
Collective Impact Timing and Sequence

There Are Several Types of Problems
FSG.ORG There Are Several Types of Problems 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 Je The social sector traditionally treats problems as simple or complicated Source: Adapted from “Getting to Maybe”

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

FSG.ORG 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 Jen All working toward the same goal and measuring the same things

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

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

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

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 . . . Jen

Collective Impact Timelines & Key Steps

A Collective Impact Approach can be taken by groups operating at different levels in a community
Where is your work? 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 Merita Issue Coalition Substance Abuse Coalition * Teen Pregnancy Intimate Partner Violence * Child Abuse & Neglect Promise Neighborhoods * Neighborhood Association Neighborhood

COLLABORATIONS Community Mobilization Advocacy
Perinatal Community Consortium Do Right by Kids campaign Task Force on Violence Counselor’s Consortium America’s Promise SACSI Comm. Asset Network Domestic Violence Partnership Rochester Children’s Collab. Domestic Violence Consortium NBN Not Me Not Now Early Childhood Develop I. Community Mobilization CCSI TIER II N.E.T. Health Action Advocacy Juvenile Justice Council City Violence Initiative Transitions Collab. Interagency Council Positive Outcomes for Youth & Families MCTP Cross - Systems Change Roch. Enterprise Community Zone P. Service Delivery Rochester‘s Child SDFSCA Planning Committees Reclaiming Youth Student Asst. Prof. Greater Roch. Area Youth 2000 Homeless Continuum of care Impl. Team Evaluation Best Practice Monroe Cty. Sch & Comm. Health Ed. Network Rochester Effectiveness Partnership Continuous Improvement OASAS Prevention Initiative Coalitions, networks, and alliances are developed to coordinate efforts between independent stakeholders with similar interests and goals. They are usually issue or population specific (teen pregnancy prevention coalitions, Out of School Time partnerships, etc.) They usual focus on service coordination and quality improvement. They frequently have an explicit goal of bringing together stakeholders together across systems (for example, aligning family, school and community based early childhood providers. Quick counts of the number of these services focused partnership can give the assurance that everything is covered. A deeper look often reveals serious challenges ranging from gaping holes—where there is no one and no coordiation to towering peaks, where there are numerous providers and multiple intermediaries with competing agendas. Issue focused coalitions partnerships and task forces are essential. They are the intermediate space between singular efforts and broad big picture planning an coordinate. And by design they have to exist in relatively large numbers to cover all outcome areas, age ranges, and strategies. There are two ways to manage the numbers: Encourage individual coalitions to be as broad, representative, and collaborative as possible given their core mission And actively monitor coalitions efforts, help them link their missions and support their interconnections to achieve broad shared goals. We will explore a tool that will help you assess where you are at. RAEYC Mentoring Round Table PCIC YRBS Group CHANGE Perinatal Substance Abuse Coalition HW & Tutoring Round Table Homeless Services Network Youth Services Quality C. RECAP Children & Family Serv. Subcomm. Adult Services Subcomm. Runaway & Homeless Youth Ser Provider Student Assistance Prof. CASAS Providers Community Profile Board of Health Community Service Board School Health Leadership Team United Neighborhood Centers Of Greater Roch. Diversion Collaborative Preventive Services Coalition Reg. 2 Preventive Provid.N COLLABORATIONS

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

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

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

Why a backbone?

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

Is this Our Civic Infrastructure?

Is our engine supporting individual opportunity for everyone?

Regional Educational Attainment
Population 4,153 Population 173,965 Population 12,660 Population 53,799 Population 169,936 Population 10,897 Population 16,589 Population 108,098 Source: U.S. Census, American Community Survey 2012, 5-Year Estimates . Populations given are for Working Age adults, ages 25-64

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

Black or African American Educational Attainment by Locality

Is our engine positioned to support economic competitiveness and growth?

Projected Degree Gap (2030) Based on Industry Mix : 27,106 Degrees
Current (45% attainment) 27,106 Degrees By 2030 Projected Industry Demand (49%) 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.

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

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

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

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

4.. Build Public Will; 3. Shared Measurement 5.. Policy Solutions/
1. Common Agenda; 6. Mobilize Resources 2. Align and Coordinate 3. Shared Measurement 5.. Policy Solutions/ Changes Local Data Research Community Voice Regional Goals and Indicators Two Regional Action Networks Identify Human Capital Gaps for Analysis and Results Facilitation Results Focusing Mobilizing Improving --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

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: Broad Regional Strategies Focused Pilot

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

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

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

Backbone Organizations Engage in Six Important Activities
FSG.ORG Backbone Organizations Engage in Six Important Activities Guide vision and strategy Support aligned activities Establish shared measurement Build public will Advance policy Mobilize funding 6 Activities of Backbone Organizations Merita

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

Backbone Diagnostic Individually: Who would you list? Pair:
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? Merita

Collective Impact Timing & Sequence

CI Efforts Tend to Transpire Over Four Phases
Governance and Infrastructure Strategic Planning CI Efforts Tend to Transpire Over Four Phases FSG.ORG Community Involvement Phase I Assess Readiness, Facilitate Dialogue Phase II Initiate Action Phase III Organize for Impact Phase IV Sustain Action and Impact Components for Success Convene community stakeholders Identify champions and form cross-sector group Evaluation And Improvement Create infrastructure (backbone and processes) 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) Hold dialogue about issue, community context, and available resources Map the landscape and use data to make case Create common agenda (common goals and strategy) Facilitate community outreach specific to goal Facilitate community outreach Engage community and build public will Jen Determine if there is consensus/urgency to move forward Analyze baseline data to ID key issues and gaps Establish shared metrics (indicators, measurement, and approach)

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

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

Launching a Collective Impact Initiative Has Three Prerequisites
FSG.ORG Launching a Collective Impact Initiative Has Three Prerequisites 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 ! Jen Financial Resources Committed funding partners Sustained funding for at least 2-3 years Pays for needed infrastructure and planning Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews and Analysis

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

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

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

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

Benefits of the Big Picture Approach
Take Shape Take Aim Take Stock Target Action Track Progress Benefits of the Big Picture Approach 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! Adaptable Roadmap Connections between steps Tackle more than one issue at a time Helps to clarify roles Builds on evidence of what works Merita Takes a whole person or whole family approach. 2. Seeks alignment with other community actors and partnerships. 3. Focuses on root causes, underlying conditions, and broader systems change. 4. Puts pressing problems into a broader, long-term, and aspirational frame.

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

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

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

FSG.ORG HANDOUTS

There Are Five Conditions to Collective Impact Success
FSG.ORG There Are Five Conditions to Collective Impact Success Common Agenda 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 Shared Measurement Collecting data and measuring results consistently across all participants ensures efforts remain aligned and participants hold each other accountable Mutually Reinforcing Activities Participant activities must be differentiated while still being coordinated through a mutually reinforcing plan of action Continuous Communication Consistent and open communication is needed across the many players to build trust, assure mutual objectives, and appreciate common motivation Backbone Support 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

Backbones Differ Depending on Local or Issue-Specific Context
FSG.ORG Backbones Differ Depending on Local or Issue-Specific Context Types of Backbones Description Examples Pros Cons 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” 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

CI Efforts Tend to Transpire Over Four Phases
Governance and Infrastructure Strategic Planning FSG.ORG CI Efforts Tend to Transpire Over Four Phases Community Involvement Phase I Assess Readiness, Facilitate Dialogue Phase II Initiate Action Phase III Organize for Impact Phase IV Sustain Action and Impact Components for Success Convene community stakeholders Identify champions and form cross-sector group Evaluation And Improvement Create infrastructure (backbone and processes) 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) Hold dialogue about issue, community context, and available resources Map the landscape and use data to make case Create common agenda (common goals and strategy) Facilitate community outreach specific to goal Facilitate community outreach Engage community and build public will Determine if there is consensus/urgency to move forward Analyze baseline data to ID key issues and gaps Establish shared metrics (indicators, measurement, and approach)

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

Appendix Each Stakeholder and group Plays a Specific Role
FSG.ORG Appendix 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

Each Stakeholder and Group Plays a Specific Role
FSG.ORG Each Stakeholder and Group Plays a Specific Role Stakeholder / Group Description and Role Community partner 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 Work Group (a.k.a. network, action team) 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 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 Backbone Organization

FSG.ORG A Backbone’s Scope and Budget May Grow Over Time, Primarily Reflecting Staff Additions And Available Resources Year 1 Year 2* Year 3 On* Executive Director Data Manager Facilitator Executive Director Data Manager Facilitator Project Coordinator Executive Director Data Manager Facilitator Project Coordinator Communications Manager Office Manager / Assistant Potential Staff: 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 Typical Responsibilities: Estimated Budget: $3-400K $5-600K $7-900K * 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 Source: FSG case work and analysis

FSG.ORG Every Backbone Needs Funding; Backbone Budgets Can Range From Around $400K to Upwards of $800K Illustration of a Backbone’s Budget: Expense Category Budget ($) Description Low High Salaries 80,000 155,000 1 FTE Executive Director 55,000 100,000 1 FTE Facilitator/Coordinator 65,000 1 FTE Data/Operations Manager 25,000 .5-1 FTE Admin. Support Benefits 45,000 84,000 At 20% of salaries Professional Fees 90,000 105,000 Consultants, R&E, Recruiting, Data Collection Travel and Meetings 7,000 30,000 Workshops, events, retreat Community Engagement 35,000 Space rental, youth stipends Communications 36,500 Reports, materials design, paid media Technology 4,900 In kind hardware, software, IT Office 74,000 In kind/paid rent, utilities, supplies Other 6,500 Staff training, miscellaneous Total Expenses 403,500 849,400 Covered by grants and fees Source: Adapted from Strive Network, TYSA, & CCER

Selecting a Backbone Is an Important Process that Should Build the Credibility of the Backbone and the Initiative FSG.ORG Open Process Semi-Open Process Predetermined 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 You can also incubate a backbone Pros: Transparent, builds credibility, open to many organizations with different skill sets Cons: Takes time, must work through potentially difficult decisions Pros: Allows for a backbone “try out,” backbone staff available from beginning of initiative Cons: May be politically difficult, and inefficient to switch backbones 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

FSG.ORG 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
FSG.ORG Steering Committee Members Should Be Carefully Recruited Sample Traits Decision Maker. CEO/President Level - Able to drive systems change relevant to effort Representative. Geographic coverage of effort (counties and subregional steering committees) as well as sector 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 Content Expertise/Practitioner. Familiar with subject matter to contribute substantively Passion and Urgency. Passionate about issue and feels real urgency for the need to change Focused on the Greater Interest. Represents need of their own organization but able to think and act in the greater interest of the community Commitment. Willing and able to commit time and energy to attend meetings and get work done

Representative Collective Impact Timeline: The First 18 Months
FSG.ORG Representative Collective Impact Timeline: The First 18 Months Initiate Action 3 6 Conduct “landscape and readiness assessment” Analyze baseline data, understand the problem, “make the case” Develop common agenda ID and recruit Steering Committee Conduct outreach to key stakeholders (gather input, build understanding, build support) Organize for Impact 6 12 18 Identify and build capacity of backbone organization Develop common agenda Create work groups; build their capacity Develop initiative-level shared measures Develop strategy-level shared measures Develop shared measurement system Conduct outreach to key stakeholders, as needed

The Nuts & Bolts of Collective Impact

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "The Nuts & Bolts of Collective Impact"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

The Nuts & Bolts of Collective Impact

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "The Nuts & Bolts of Collective Impact"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback