Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Boston | Geneva | Mumbai | San Francisco | Seattle | Washington FSG.ORG Shared Value, Collective Impact and Postsecondary Attainment: New Approaches to.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Boston | Geneva | Mumbai | San Francisco | Seattle | Washington FSG.ORG Shared Value, Collective Impact and Postsecondary Attainment: New Approaches to."— Presentation transcript:

1 Boston | Geneva | Mumbai | San Francisco | Seattle | Washington FSG.ORG Shared Value, Collective Impact and Postsecondary Attainment: New Approaches to Familiar Challenges May 23, 2013 Prepared for: CCNCCE 22nd Annual International Conference

2 FSG.ORG 2 © 2012 FSG About FSG FSG Overview Nonprofit consulting firm specializing in strategy, evaluation and research Partner with foundations, corporations, nonprofits, and governments to develop more effective solutions to the world’s most challenging issues Recognized thought leader in philanthropy and corporate social responsibility

3 FSG.ORG 3 © 2012 FSG The US’ Postsecondary Attainment Rate Has Stagnated, Threatening the Nation’s Economic Competitiveness And Individual Prosperity Source: (1) Speech by Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the United States Federal Reserve, given at the U.S. Chamber Education and Workforce Summit, Washington, D.C. 9/24/2007; (2) OECD, Education at a Glance 2002 and 2009; Bureau of Labor Statistics “Economists have long recognized that the skills of the workforce are an important source of economic growth. Moreover, as the increase over time in the returns to education and skill is likely the single greatest cause of the long-term rise in economic inequality, policies that lead to broad investments in education and training can help reduce inequality while expanding economic opportunity” 1 Unemployment and Earnings Correlated with Educational Attainment Economic Competitiveness Among OECD countries, US ranks 11th in percent of college graduates age (4 th overall)

4 FSG.ORG 4 © 2012 FSG Increased focus on degree completion Increased alignment with K-12 Postsecondary Education Is Feeling Pressures To Change Innovative delivery / business models Increased alignment with labor market Massive open online courses

5 5 © 2013 FSG FSG.ORG 5 © 2012 FSG Community Colleges Are Increasingly Recognized for Their Critical Role in Education, But Are Being Asked to Do More with Less Source: FSG interviews, survey, and research analysis Notes: (1) AACC 2011 Fast Facts, (2) (3) Carnavale, Smith, and Strohl, “Help Wanted: Projections of jobs an education requirements through 2018” Community colleges play an increasingly important role in the U.S. higher education system In 2008, 44% of all U.S. undergraduates attended community colleges¹ Community colleges have achieved notable success in extending college access to millions of first-time college goers and low-income young adults Community colleges are being called upon to shift their focus from access to student success Today, only 40% of community college students either graduate or transfer to a four-year institution within three years² For students, this low rate of success closes off opportunity for the best and most rapidly growing jobs – 63% of all new jobs through 2018 will require more than a high school diploma³ Community colleges face severe resource constraints that hinder their abilities to transform Community colleges receive just 27% of federal, state, and local revenues for public degree-granting institutions, and budgets are being cut across the country Community colleges often lack the resources, skills, knowledge, and experience to improve student success rates on their own Community colleges would greatly benefit from the engagement of other stakeholders to succeed in their educational mission Community Colleges Today

6 6 © 2013 FSG FSG.ORG 6 © 2012 FSG Strong leadership: leadership preparation, ongoing training, and integration throughout the institution Faculty development: specifically around improving the skills of part-time instructors Use of data: using data to drive improvement in the classroom and organization Student learning and supports: rethinking structures and services to help high-needs students succeed in and outside of the classroom Organizational effectiveness: strategic planning and change management to drive and sustain improvement Long-term planning and change management support in order to re-design institutions to drive completion Effective use of data to help colleges organize, analyze, and communicate data to improve instruction or college operations Student services and structures that support completion, particularly for high-needs students Faculty development to improve the quality of instruction in the classroom, particularly among adjunct faculty Student Engagement and Faculty Development are Areas In Which Partnerships Can Greatly Benefit Community Colleges Source: FSG interviews, survey, and research analysis Five capacities present the most critical needs for improving student success Across these capacities, there is broad agreement that support from external providers is critical in four key areas Student engagement and faculty development were identified as two of the four most critical areas where external engagement could be helpful The Needs of Community Colleges Research Findings – Needs of Community Colleges

7 Not for distribution 7 © 2012 FSG 7 “Corporate policies and practices that enhance competitiveness of the company while simultaneously advancing social and economic conditions in the communities in which it sells and operates” “Shared Value holds the key to unlocking the next wave of business innovation and growth” What is “Creating Shared Value”?

8 FSG.ORG 8 © 2012 FSG “Creating Shared Value“ – The Simultaneous Creation of Value for Business And Society Creating Business Value: Investments in long- term competitiveness Creating Social Value: Investments that address social and environmental objectives Creating Shared Value: Investments in long-term competitiveness that simultaneously address social and environmental objectives Creating Shared Value

9 FSG.ORG 9 © 2012 FSG Creating Shared Value Is an Evolution of The Role of Corporations in Society -Targeted leveraging of company know- how and assets -Social issues related to core business Social ResponsibilityPhilanthropy -Donations and / or volunteering -Social issues often generic -The realization that relevant social issues also represent business opportunities Creating Shared Value -Society: More resources for good causes -Companies: Reputation and goodwill -Society: Strategic social projects and initiatives -Companies: Reputation, know- how, motivation… -Society: Problem-solving, lasting change -Companies: New markets, competitive advantage

10 FSG.ORG 10 © 2012 FSG The long-term competitiveness of companies depends on social conditions −Improving education and skills −Safe working conditions −Sustainable use of natural resources −A sense of fairness and equal opportunity −A transparent business environment Business has an essential role to play in solving social problems −Only companies can create prosperity that funds government and civil society −Companies can create sustainable and scalable solutions to many social problems in ways that governments and NGOs cannot −Businesses can overcome constraints that limit their growth Past thinking about sustainability has focused too much on the friction between business and society rather than their interdependence Social Progress and Corporate Success are Inextricably Linked

11 FSG.ORG 11 © 2012 FSG Companies Can Create Shared Value In Three Ways Enabling Local Cluster Development Redefining Productivity in the Value Chain Reconceiving Products and Markets

12 FSG.ORG 12 © 2012 FSG 12 © 2012 FSG The Kenyan Flower Industry Illustrates the Interconnected, Interdependent Nature of a Geographic Industry Cluster Definition of a Cluster Cluster Definition: “Geographic concentrations of interconnected companies and institutions in a particular field” Example: The Kenyan flower industry depends on interactions among the following stakeholders: Smallholder farmers Commercial farmers Plant-stock producers Input providers (irrigation, fertilizer, pesticides, etc) Government horticultural agency Non-governmental organizations promoting horticulture and flowers Trade and industry associations Research institutions Public universities with post-graduate programs in horticulture Quality and standards setting groups Packaging and labeling providers Refrigerated trucks Freight forwarders Clearing and forwarding agents Air carriers Linkages with tourism cluster, agriculture cluster and horticulture cluster “A cluster’s boundaries are defined by the linkages and complementarities across industries and institutions that are most important to competition”

13 FSG.ORG 13 © 2012 FSG 13 © 2012 FSG Illustrative Map: The Kenyan Flower Cluster Kenyan flower example Plantstock Greenhouse; Shading Structures Irrigation Technology Pre-Cooling Technology Fertilizers, Pesticides, Herbicides Agricultural Cluster Horticultural Cluster Post-Harvest Cooling Technology Grading / Packaging Sheds Packaging & Labeling Materials Refrigerated Trucks Freight Forwarders Clearing and Forwarding Agents Air Carriers (Commercial / Charters) Tourism Cluster Flower Farming Post-Harvest Handling; Transport to Market Horticultural Agencies, NGOs & Industry Associations Horticultural Crops Development Authority (HCDA) Government Export Policies Targeting Horticulture Non-Government Organizations (e.g., The Rural Enterprise Agri-Business Promotion Project) Trade & Industry Associations (e.g., Kenya Flower Council) Education, Research & Quality Standards Organizations Research Institutions (e.g., Kenya Agricultural Research Institute) Public Universities with Post Graduate Degrees in Horticulture (e.g., University of Nairobi) Quality & Standards (e.g., EUREGAP Standard, Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Services) Sources: MOC student team research by Kusi Hornberger, Nick Ndiritu, Lalo Ponce-Brito, Melesse Tashu, Tijan Watt, Harvard Business School, 2007

14 FSG.ORG 14 © 2012 FSG 14 © 2012 FSG 1.Increase Productivity a.Better access to employees and suppliers b.Access to specialized information c.Complementarities and benefits of co-location d.Access to institutions and public goods e.Better motivation and measurement 2.Accelerate Innovation a.Sophisticated buyers are part of clusters b.Capability and flexibility to act rapidly c.Experiment at lower cost _______________________ Innovation underpins future productivity growth 3.Stimulate New Business a.Lower barriers to entry b.Concentrated demand c.Positive feedback loop _______________________ Increased competition leads to higher standards and more rapid innovation, which ultimately reinforces the cluster Successful Clusters Lead to Increases in Local Productivity, Innovation, and New Business Formation Clusters promote both competition as well as cooperation – both of which positively impact productivity of an industry Cluster theory of change Clusters Increase Competitiveness Through the Following:

15 FSG.ORG 15 © 2012 FSG 15 © 2012 FSG Clusters Can Be Strengthened by Improving Operating Conditions and Increasing Demand Surrounding a Sector Cluster-building activities are self-reinforcing Cluster levers Improve Competitive Context Eliminate barriers to local competition Facilitate investment in cluster affiliates Engage in targeted export promotion Improve Input Conditions Create education and training programs Partner with universities and institutions around R&D Support cluster-specific information gathering Improve access to inputs Support Related Industries Sponsor forums and dialog Encourage efforts to attract suppliers and service providers from other sectors Establish cluster-specific industrial parks Invest in ancillary industry Improve Demand Conditions Encourage pro-innovation regulatory standards Sponsor independent testing and product certification Introduce sophisticated buyers Promote outputs to buyers Bullets are illustrative examples and represent only a subset of possible cluster strengthening activities

16 FSG.ORG 16 © 2012 FSG 16 © 2012 FSG Ultimately all of the supporting activities by Rio Tinto are reinforcing to the other businesses and organizations of the local mining cluster Rio Tinto example Northern Canada – Rio Tinto Invests in Local Capacity Building at All Levels: Education, Worker Training, and Supplier Operations Supplier Development Sources local inputs Supports capacity building for local businesses to grow into suppliers of goods and services for the mine, with a focus on aboriginal businesses Worker Training Partners with communities, educational institutions and government to train workers through infrastructure construction and mining activities Education Promotes careers in diamond mining in youth Employs and trains students through apprenticeships Education Training Supplier Development Schools Universities Municipal gov’t Contractors Local NGOs Municipal gov’t Marginalized population Big businesses Contractors Local NGOs Municipal gov’t Partners

17 FSG.ORG 17 © 2012 FSG 17 © 2012 FSG Companies Often Collaborate with Local IHEs to Improve Local Workforce Quality Other Examples of Cluster-building partnerships In both of these examples student engagement and service learning benefits students, employers, and the local economy as a whole San Jacinto College is located in the midst of much of Houston’s industrial base It has leveraged this location to develop many industry partnerships focused on meeting local workforce needs, including:  Automotive Technology Program with Ford, GM, Honda and Toyota  Diesel Technology Program with Cummins Engine Company  Process Technology Program with local pharmaceutical and petrochemical firms Cal Poly has partnered with Northrup Grumman, Parsons and Raytheon to develop an undergraduate program in cybersecurity Building on its existing large undergraduate engineering base and with corporate support, Cal Poly is adding a lab, designing a new curriculum, creating applied research opportunities, and a developing a graduate-level certificate program Source: Chancellor Brenda Hellyer testimony to Texas State Senate; Business-Higher Education Forum, “National and Regional Workforce Solutions"

18 FSG.ORG 18 © 2012 FSG How to Use Shared Value Concepts to Make the Case to Potential Corporate Partners Identify constraints on the business that the partnership would enable the company to fix (e.g., quality of the local labor pool; ability to attract workers from other regions) Encourage them to let go of preconceived ideas about the relationship of employers to educational institutions and to instead envision what a productive partnership would look like Get them to think in terms of improving communities and strengthening the competitive context, in addition to immediate profit-and-loss concerns

19 FSG.ORG 19 © 2012 FSG Complex Systems Change: Juvenile Justice in New York $286,00089% recidivism rate= Collective Impact: Overview

20 FSG.ORG 20 © 2012 FSG Actors In the New York Juvenile Justice System Source: FSG interviews and analysis; State of NY Juvenile Justice Advisory Group, “State of NY, 2009–2012: Three-Year Comprehensive State Plan for the JJ and Delinquency Prevention Formula Grant Program.” Collective Impact: Overview

21 FSG.ORG 21 © 2012 FSG There Are Several Types of Problems Source: Adapted from “Getting to Maybe” Simple Complicated Baking a CakeSending a Rocket to the Moon Social sector treats problems as simple or complicated Complex Raising a Child Collective Impact: Overview

22 FSG.ORG 22 © 2012 FSG Traditional Approaches Are Not Solving Our Toughest – Often Complex – Challenges Funders select individual grantees Organizations work separately and compete Evaluation attempts to isolate a particular organization’s impact Large scale change is assumed to depend on scaling organizations Corporate and government sectors are often disconnected from foundations and nonprofits Isolated Impact Collective Impact: Overview

23 FSG.ORG 23 © 2012 FSG Imagine a Different Approach – Multiple Players Working Together to Solve Complex Issues All working toward the same goal and measuring the same things Cross-sector alignment with government, nonprofit, philanthropic and corporate sectors as partners Organizations actively coordinating their action and sharing lessons learned Isolated ImpactCollective Impact Collective Impact: Overview

24 FSG.ORG 24 © 2012 FSG Collective Impact Is a Unique and Differentiated Approach to Bringing Actors Across Sectors Together to Work Toward a Common Agenda Collective Impact: Overview It is distinct from other forms of collaboration Type of CollaborationDefinition Collective Impact Initiatives Long-term commitments by a group of important actors from different sectors to a common agenda for solving a specific social problem Funder Collaboratives Groups of funders interested in supporting the same issue who pool their resources Public-Private Partnerships Partnerships formed between government and private sector organizations to deliver specific services or benefits Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives Voluntary activities by stakeholders from different sectors around a common theme Social Sector Networks Groups of individuals or organizations fluidly connected through purposeful relationships, whether formal or informal More Elements of Collective Impact

25 FSG.ORG 25 © 2012 FSG Achieving Large-Scale Change through Collective Impact Involves Five Key Elements Common Agenda Common understanding of the problem Shared vision for change Shared Measurement Collecting data and measuring results Focus on performance management Shared accountability Mutually Reinforcing Activities Differentiated approaches Willingness to adapt individual activities Coordination through joint plan of action Continuous Communication Consistent and open communication Focus on building trust Backbone Support Separate organization(s) with staff Resources and skills to convene and coordinate participating organizations Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews Collective Impact: Overview

26 FSG.ORG 26 © 2012 FSG Collective Impact Is Best Structured with “Cascading Levels of Collaboration” Shared Measures Backbone Governance, Vision and Strategy Action Planning Implementation Public Will Common Agenda Steering Committee Community Members Partners Working Groups

27 FSG.ORG 27 © 2012 FSG 27 © 2012 FSG The Collective Impact Approach Can Apply to Solving Many Complex Social Issues Education Healthcare Economic Development Youth Development Homelessness Community Development * * * * * Indicates FSG Client Collective Impact: Overview

28 FSG.ORG 28 © 2012 FSG Collective Impact Working in Collective Impact Requires a Mindset Shift Adaptive vs. Technical Problem Solving No Silver Bullets.… But we do have Silver Buckshot Credibility vs. Credit Allowing answers to come from within Supporting common agenda building, information sharing and coordination/ alignment Many small changes implemented in alignment can add up to large scale progress Creating new incentives to work collaboratively vs. competitively

29 FSG.ORG 29 © 2012 FSG Less than 25% of South King County and South Seattle’s High School Graduates Were Earning College Degrees (2010) City Limits School Districts Road Map Districts Although 67% of Jobs Will Require it by % students in the Road Map Region are students of color 54% students in the Road Map Region are low-income 167 different primary languages are spoken in the Road Map Region 17% students in the Road Map Region are English Language Learner (ELL) students Source: FSG Interviews and Collective Impact in Practice: CCER There are about 116,000 students in the Road Map region who make up 11% of Washington state public school students and 45% of students in King County.

30 FSG.ORG 30 © 2012 FSG Our goal is to double the number of students in South King County and South Seattle who are on track to graduate from college or earn a career credential by We are committed to nothing less than closing the unacceptable achievement gaps for low income students and children of color, and increasing achievement for all students from cradle to college and career. Road Map for Education Results Had Defined a Specific, Shared Goal Collective Impact in Practice: CCER

31 FSG.ORG 31 © 2012 FSG A Wide Array of Stakeholders Participating in Several Groups Contribute to the Project Collective Impact in Practice: CCER

32 FSG.ORG 32 © 2012 FSG Road Map for Education Results 32 Robust Data Capacity Powerful Community Voice Aligned Funding Early learning providers Youth development organizations Districts Place-based projects Community colleges 4-year institutions Improved Outcomes Across Road Map Indicators 2020 Goal Aligned Organizational Actions Regionwide System Building Strategies and Actions Source: FSG Internal Collective Impact in Practice: CCER

33 FSG.ORG 33 © 2012 FSG Healthy and ready for Kindergarten Supported and successful in school Graduate from high school -- college and career-ready Earn a college degree or career credential Progress is reported using the following measures: The Project Is Tracking a Series of Shared Indicators % students proficient in 3 rd grade reading % students proficient in 4 th grade math % 9 th graders who pass end of course algebra exam % students motivated and engaged to succeed in school % students who are not triggering all three Early Warning indicators % parents who believe a college degree is important and actively support their child’s education % students graduating high school meeting proposed Washington State graduation requirements % students who take SAT/ACT and/or take a community college placement test in high school % high school graduates who take developmental education courses in college % students who earn a post-secondary credential by age 26 % students who enroll in postsecondary education % students who persist year to year % children meeting kindergarten readiness standards % children accessing comprehensive medical and dental care % eligible children enrolled in evidence- based early learning programs Readiness AttainmentAchievement Collective Impact in Practice: CCER

34 FSG.ORG 34 © 2012 FSG The Road Map Project Has Institutionalized Policy Changes Successfully by Catalyzing Existing Policy Reform Efforts The Road Map Project assembled a work group, called the Community Network and Advocacy Council, specifically focused on policy efforts Collective Impact in Practice: CCER Accelerated pre-existing state-level efforts to standardize a statewide assessment system to evaluate kindergarten readiness (the Washington Kindergarten Inventory of Developing Skills, or WaKIDS, was piloted in 2010 and is now required for all state-funded full-day kindergarten classes) Backbone Executive Director was particularly effective in leveraging prior relationships and conducting one-to-one conversations with state officials Accelerated pre-existing state-level efforts to standardize a statewide assessment system to evaluate kindergarten readiness (the Washington Kindergarten Inventory of Developing Skills, or WaKIDS, was piloted in 2010 and is now required for all state-funded full-day kindergarten classes) Backbone Executive Director was particularly effective in leveraging prior relationships and conducting one-to-one conversations with state officials Source: FSG Interviews & Analysis; The Road Map Project Baseline Report (2011) Encouraged local community colleges to send acceptance letters to all high school graduates meeting minimum criteria for admission Increased student enrollment in College Bound Scholarship process, through which students who register in middle school can become eligible for college scholarships after high school graduation Catalyzed the adoption of a uniform early warning system across Road Map Districts to flag when students lag behind important academic and non-academic indicators Encouraged local community colleges to send acceptance letters to all high school graduates meeting minimum criteria for admission Increased student enrollment in College Bound Scholarship process, through which students who register in middle school can become eligible for college scholarships after high school graduation Catalyzed the adoption of a uniform early warning system across Road Map Districts to flag when students lag behind important academic and non-academic indicators State Successfully advocated for the approval of Seattle’s 2011 Families and Education Levy (this led to an investment of $230 M over seven years to improve outcomes across the full education continuum from cradle to college and career; a similar levy was first passed in 1990) Institutional Local / Regional Select Policy Efforts by the Road Map Project Include:

35 FSG.ORG 35 © 2012 FSG Although the Project Is Still in Its Nascent Stages, Results Have Already Improved 94% of 5,062 eligible 8 th Graders in the region applied for the College Bound Scholarship in 2012 [89% of eligible 8 th Graders completed their application] 76% of Road Map seniors who signed up for the College Bound Scholarship completed the FAFSA (out of 1,508 eligible seniors) [28 FAFSA completion events were held in the region this year, compared to only 15 events last year] 7% increase in Extended Graduation rates in the Road Map Region Source: FSG Interviews and Analysis; Road Map Project WebsiteRoad Map Project Website Collective Impact in Practice: CCER Baseline Report Published Funders group launched, that meets regularly to assess joint impact on education funding in the area, from cradle to college A group of Superintendents and College Presidents from 7 Districts and 5 Colleges meet regularly to plan and work together Other Notable Impacts Include:

36 FSG.ORG 36 © 2012 FSG Partners for a Competitive Workforce Partners for a Competitive Workforce Seeks to Prepare a More Skilled Workforce in the Tri- State “OKI” Region Goals: 90% of the Labor Force Will Be Gainfully Employed by Connect businesses with qualified workers 2.Align education with employer needs 3.Improve work readiness 4.Analyze and provide data on labor market trends and talent supply chain performance 5.Align funding and policy to support improvements along the talent supply chain

37 37 © 2013 FSG FSG.ORG 37 © 2012 FSG Partners Has Achieved Several “Early Wins” Source: Partners for a Competitive Workforce Proven success of model in healthcare industry; now expanding to advanced manufacturing and construction More than $29M in public and private funds from local, state, and national sources leveraged since 2008 More than 6,100 individuals served toward career pathways, and more than 4,600 credentials completed Created a common, region-wide workforce data collection and reporting system to track results and improve performance that is used by 50 public and nonprofit agencies Developed and advanced a public policy agenda with partners through advocacy at the local, state, and federal levels Partners for a Competitive Workforce

38 38 © 2013 FSG FSG.ORG 38 © 2012 FSG Summing Up: Implications for Community Engagement 1 Use Shared Value concepts to frame the case for engagement to corporate partners Identify constraints on the business Let go of preconceived ideas about partnerships Think in terms of improving communities and strengthening the competitive context 2 Identify ways that community colleges can catalyze Collective Impact efforts that align and leverage resources across the community Systems change requires a long-term, shared vision and an adaptive approach Identify other champions in the community who can help catalyze actions Use data to create a sense of urgency

39 FSG.ORG 39 © 2012 FSG Thank You! Jeff Cohen Director, FSG (206) More resources available on

Download ppt "Boston | Geneva | Mumbai | San Francisco | Seattle | Washington FSG.ORG Shared Value, Collective Impact and Postsecondary Attainment: New Approaches to."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google