1. Collective Impact Collaborating for Collective Wins
Re-Frame Conference 2014
Johnson City, TN
Leslie Crutchfield, FSG senior advisor

2. FSG Helps Leaders Achieve Greater Social Impact
Consulting
Services
Thought Leadership
Client
Organizations
Corporations:
Foundations:
Nonprofits:
Governments and Multilaterals:
Strategy: Devise clear goals and effective strategies that apply resources to maximum potential
Implementation: Develop and execute action plans that mesh strategy with organizational realities
Organizational Change: Align organizations and operations in support of strategies to ensure maximum social impact
Evaluation: Make strategic decisions and take informed action using evaluation
Coalition Building: Build cross-sector collaborations, unite stakeholders to achieve large-scale collective impact 2

3. Three Types of Societal Problems
Simple
Baking a Cake
Sending a Rocket to the Moon
Complicated
Complex
Raising a Child
Simple Problem: The right “recipe” is essential but once you’ve discovered it, replication will get you almost the same result every time
Complicated Problem: The right “protocols and formulas” are needed, as are high levels of expertise and training – experience is built over time to get to the right result, which can be repeated over time with the expectation of success
Complex Problem: There are no “right” recipes or protocols that work in every situation. There are many outside factors that influence the situation, and every situation is unique. Experience helps, but in no way guarantees success
The social sector often treats problems as simple or complicated
Source: Adapted from “Getting to Maybe”

4. What is Collective Impact?
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

5. 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
Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews and Analysis

6. Collective Impact Involves 5 Key Elements1
Common Agenda
Common understanding of the problem
Shared vision for change 2
Shared Measurement
Collecting data and measuring results
Focus on performance management
Shared accountability 3
Mutually Reinforcing Activities
Differentiated approaches
Coordination through joint plan of action 4
Continuous Communication
Consistent and open communication
Focus on building trust 5
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 and Analysis

7. Collective Impact Is a Distinct Approach
Type of Collaboration
Definition
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
Source: FSG Interviews and Analysis

8. Collective Impact Applies to Many Problems
Education
Health
Homelessness *
Youth Development
Economic Development
Community Development *
Collective Impact can be applied to various issues * *
* Indicates FSG Client

9. 30% started drinking at age 12 or 13
40% smoked pot in 12th grade

10. Collective Impact in Rural Massachusetts1 2
Common Agenda
Shared Measurement
Problem Definition: In 2002 alcohol, tobacco, and drug use among youth became a pressing issue in the rural Franklin communities
Solution: CTC brought together all parts of community to promote the health and well-being of youth in Franklin County and North Quabbin, MA. Focus is to reduce alcohol and other drug use
Works with rural school districts to conduct annual Teen Health Survey to examine student behaviors, assesses "risk factors" and "protective factors" to maintain safety
Evaluation via participant population-level pre- and post-program survey information
Coalition gathers quantitative data, including arrest records, court data , hospital records of substance-related injuries 4
Continuous Communication 3 5
Mutually Reinforcing Activities
Backbone Support Organization
Eight “organizational” groups working together to implement the Coalition’s reinforcing strategies:
1. Coordinating council: a cross-sector leadership group (decision-making body)
2-4. Workgroups: Community Norms and Laws, Parent Education, Youth Recognition, which all lead the day-to-day work of the coalition
5. Regional School Health representatives from school districts working to implement student surveys, activities in schools
6. The community: businesses, civic groups government, parents and youth
7-8. Cohost groups (backbones): Community Action and Community Coalition for Teens
Internal Communication:
Coalition meets twice a year
Council meets monthly
Other meetings as needed
External Communication:
Parent Education work group creates social marketing campaigns for parents
CTC website continuously updated with newsletters and progress towards goals
Coalition is “co-hosted” by:
Community Action of the Franklin, Hampshire and North Quabbin Regions and
Community Coalition for Teens, program of the Franklin Regional Council of Governments
Each donates 4 hours/week of staff time
Shared administrative duties:
Maintaining mailing and lists
Convening meetings (including food, space, agenda, notification)
Media advocacy
Record keeping and communicating outcomes to all

11. Case Study: Collection Impact in Action

12. Juvenile Justice in New York
Talking Points:
Imagine you are 15 years old (again)…did you ever made a mistake?...I want to tell you a story about a 15 year old boy named [WHATEVER].  15 years old, African American, low-income, and living with his Aunt in the Bronx.   Shoplifts a $50 pair of shoes.  This is his first and only offense.  She goes to court, is put on probation but unfortunately, he violates his probation by missing a day of school and winds up being placed in a limited-secure facility for almost a year.  This facility is located 2 hours upstate, and is difficult for his aunt to get to. At 15 years old.  He is not alone.  In NY state there are many young people who just shouldn’t be incarcerated but get dumped into the system for moderate infractions.  53 percent of the roughly 1,600 young people who entered the state’s juvenile facilities had a misdemeanor as their most serious offense. 
What we’re talking about here is a broken system that fails to deliver on its responsibilities to care for and rehabilitate young people, while also failing in its responsibilities to improve public safety. The system is ineffective, inefficient, and unsafe.   In New York State, youth who end up in secure facilities have near a 90% recidivism rate. And incarcerating these youth costs the state $290K per year.
What exactly are we talking about when we say the system doesn’t work?  Well, the NYJJ “system” is comprised of hundreds of public and private agencies that span the courts, law enforcement, probation, county services, state agencies, multiplied across 62 counties.  In addition, the juvenile justice “system” must coordinate with education, mental health, child welfare, in order to serve youth while they are in state care and to responsibly transition them back into the communities—and today, this just isn’t happening to the degree it needs to.
How do you go about addressing a problem like this?  It’s clear that a single intervention isn’t going to do it.  Scaling up one rehabilitation provider, changing one law, re-engineering one state agency isn’t going to cut it – this is a complex social problem.
So what do you do about it?  Well, here’s a start.  We spent a year with these stakeholders, helping them to come together to have collective impact. And:
EMILY: Because of our work, key stakeholders (fill in: law enforcement, county services, state agencies, the courts, child advocacy orgs, etc) were able to work across decades-old silos to get to a common understanding of the problem, and a common vision around youth success and public safety.
JEFF: Because of our work, a new “backbone” org was formed and staffed within the NY Governor’s office to coordinate the actions of these stakeholders to work for kids
LAURA: Because of our work, the exact language of our recommendations to the steering group will be incorporated into NYS law (soon to be signed)
CHRIS: Because of our work, the heads of state agencies and across systems—education, child welfare, criminal justice—are now meeting together as a cabinet, for the first time ever
RAJNI: Because of our work, if this bill passes, kids will be placed in facilities that are closer to their homes, which will lead to better outcomes for those kids (his parent can visit more easily, he can be built into the community better, etc), and judges will have more evidence-based options than just putting kids in mini-jail  (e.g., something that’s demonstrated to work for rehabilitation)
ROBERT: Because of our work,  in the June legislative session, a number of the secure juvenile justice facilities were closed which were a huge drain on the economic system. This is a huge win for kids, as it means they are no longer being sent to these places.
Fay: Because of our work, 15 year olds that make mistakes can have hope for a full life.  This is just one story of many where we have been able to get cross-sector actors to work together to solve complex social problems, including education reform, sustainable farming, and reducing substance abuse.  And that is the power of collective impact.
$286, per youth
89% recidivism rate

13. New York’s System Is Fragmented and Complex
The New York State Juvenile Justice System Has Been Historically Punitive, Highly Expensive, and Criminogenic*
What is the Juvenile Justice System?
In New York State, the juvenile justice system is a highly complex network of actors, policies, procedures, and institutions, with an array of agencies and other organizations—both public and private—and courts involved at a state and local level.
It also includes connections to other systems, like the education, mental health, substance abuse, and child welfare systems. These connections are critical to providing quality services for youth while the youth are involved in the juvenile justice system and for ensuring a successful transition and reintegration back into the community.
What challenges does it face?
Despite state annual placement costs that are among the highest in the nation, the vast majority of youth who pass through the deep-end of the system (less than 3% of youth who encounter the system) return as adult offenders
In NYS, over 60% of youth are rearrested within two years of release from state custody
Parts of the state placement system are under U.S. Department of Justice oversight and are the subject of a lawsuit for brutal conditions of confinement, and the system does not ensure the safety of all youth and system professionals
Source: FSG Interviews and Analysis; State of NY Juvenile Justice Advisory Group, “State of NY, 2009–2011: Three-Year Comprehensive State Plan for the JJ and Delinquency Prevention Formula Grant Program.”

14. Collective Impact Involves 5 Key Elements1
Common Agenda
Common understanding of the problem
Shared vision for change 2
Shared Measurement
Collecting data and measuring results
Focus on performance management
Shared accountability 3
Mutually Reinforcing Activities
Differentiated approaches
Coordination through joint plan of action 4
Continuous Communication
Consistent and open communication
Focus on building trust 5
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 and Analysis

15. Steering Committee Set High-Level Outcome Goals
Vision: Across New York State, the juvenile justice system promotes youth success and ensures public safety
Community Outcomes
Youth Outcomes
Just and fair to youth
Services to meet youth development needs
Successful reintegration of youth
Community safety and quality of life
Delinquent acts
Victims have a voice
in the process
Community Outcomes:
Community quality of life and safety are enhanced because youth are held accountable in a fair and just manner, and the system itself is held accountable for positive outcomes
Fewer delinquent acts are committed, both in initial offenses and in reoffending
Victims are given an opportunity to have a voice in the process, and efforts are made to remedy harm when possible
Youth Outcomes:
Youth are held accountable in a fair and just manner that is consistent with adolescent development
Youth are objectively assessed and receive timely, effective services that build upon their strengths and meet their needs
Youth are successfully reintegrated into appropriate education settings and the community when they exit the system, supporting ongoing positive youth development and reducing reoffending
System Governance and Coordination: Structures at the state and local level ensure coordination and accountability within and across the agencies, courts, and other organizations that constitute the JJ system and other relevant systems.
Effective Continuum of Diversion, Supervision, Treatment, and Confinement:The agencies, courts, and other organizations that constitute the JJ system effectively assess, serve, and assign youth to appropriate options, as close to home as is feasible.
Accountability of System and Organizations Within the System: The agencies, courts, and other organizations that constitute the JJ system are individually and collectively accountable for achieving system goals.
Shared Data and Information Driven Decisions and Policy: The agencies, courts, and other organizations that constitute the JJ system and other relevant systems share and analyze qualitative and quantitative data to guide service provision, decision making, and system-level reform and policy.
Components of System Excellence
System Governance and Coordination
Effective Continuum of Diversion, Supervision, Treatment, and Confinement
Accountability of System and Organizations Within the System
Shared Data and Information Driven Decisions and Policy 1 2 3 4
Source: FSG Interviews and Analysis

16. Cascading Levels of Collaboration were Used
Common Agenda
Shared Measures
Steering Committee
Governance,
Vision, and Strategy
Backbone
Working Groups
Action Planning
Talking Points:
Role of Steering Committee - TBD
Role of Working Group- TBD
Role of Partners- TBD
Role of Community Members- TBD
Role of Back Bone, see next slide
Partners
Implementation
Community Members
Public Will
Source: FSG Interviews and Analysis

17. Collective Impact Can Develop in Three Phases
Phase I
Initiate Action
Phase II
Organize for Impact
Phase III
Sustain Action & Impact
Components for Success
Identify champions and form cross-sector group
Create infrastructure (backbone and processes)
Facilitate and refine
Governance and
Infrastructure
Map the landscape and use data to make case
Create common agenda (goals, strategy)
Support implementation (alignment to goal and strategies)
Strategic Planning
Facilitate community outreach
Engage community and build public will
Continue engagement, conduct advocacy
Before Phase 1: It is important to recognize that the initiative must build on any collaborative efforts that are already underway
Community Involvement
Analyze baseline data to identify key issues and gaps
Establish shared metrics (indicators, measurement, and approach)
Collect, track, report progress (process to learn and improve)
Evaluation and Improvement
Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews and Analysis

18. The First Step: Develop a Common Agenda1 3
Describe the Problem (informed by research)
Develop a Portfolio of Strategies to Drive Large-Scale Change 2
Set a Clear Goal for Change 5
Choose an Evaluation Approach that Allows for Receiving and Integrating Feedback 4
Develop a Set of Principles that can Guide the Group’s Behavior
Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews

19. Collective Impact Involves 5 Key Elements1
Common Agenda
Common understanding of the problem
Shared vision for change 2
Shared Measurement
Collecting data and measuring results
Focus on performance management
Shared accountability 3
Mutually Reinforcing Activities
Differentiated approaches
Coordination through joint plan of action 4
Continuous Communication
Consistent and open communication
Focus on building trust 5
Backbone Support
Separate organization(s) with staff
Resources and skills to convene and coordinate participating organizations

20. Shared Measurement is Critical to Success
Definition
Identifying meaningful common metrics for tracking progress toward a common agenda across organizations, and providing scalable platforms to share data, discuss learnings, and improve strategy and action
Benefits of Using Shared Measurement
Tracking Progress Toward a Shared Goal
Enabling Coordination and Collaboration
Learning and Course Correction
Catalyzing Action

21. Tips for Developing Successful Shared Metrics
Limit “top-level” indicators to a manageable number (~15), with additional contributing indicators if needed
Establish a set of criteria to guide the identification and prioritization of potential indicators
Identifying Indicators
Set specific and time-bound goals and report progress relative
Include data on whole populations (vs. a sample) where possible
Use numbers as well as percentages to make goals more tangible
Collecting and Presenting Data
Form a voluntary team of data experts to advise on the design, development, and deployment of a shared measurement system
Develop a crosswalk of what partners are already measuring
Try to leverage existing indicators already adopted at local, provincial, or federal levels
Leveraging Existing Efforts and Expertise

22. Challenges within Shared Measurement Systems
Difficulty agreeing on common outcomes and indicators
Concerns about relative performance / comparative measures across providers working in the same field
Limited capacity (time and skill) for measurement and data analysis within participating organizations
Aligning funders to request common measures as part of their reporting requirements, and aligning their funding with that
Time and cost of developing and maintaining a system, both for human capital and technology

23. Collective Impact in Action
Strive Together Partnership
Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky

24. Student Roadmap to Success

25. Collective Impact Involves 5 Key Elements1
Common Agenda
Common understanding of the problem
Shared vision for change 2
Shared Measurement
Collecting data and measuring results
Focus on performance management
Shared accountability 3
Mutually Reinforcing Activities
Differentiated approaches
Coordination through joint plan of action 4
Continuous Communication
Consistent and open communication
Focus on building trust 5
Backbone Support
Separate organization(s) with staff
Resources and skills to convene and coordinate participating organizations

26. Common Misperceptions about Backbones
“The backbone organization sets the agenda for the group”
“The backbone organization drives the solutions”
“The backbone organization receives all the funding”
“The role of backbone can be self appointed rather than selected by the community”
“The role of backbone isn’t fundamentally different from ‘business as usual’ in terms of staffing, time, and resources”
Source: FSG Interviews and Analysis

27. Six Key Roles of the Backbone Organization
Guide Vision and Strategy
Support Aligned Activities
Establish Shared Measurement Practices
Build Public Will
Guide Vision and Strategy: Build a common understanding of the problem; Provide strategic guidance to develop a common agenda
Support Aligned Activities: Convene external stakeholders to do mutually reinforcing activities; Facilitate communication and collaboration; Catalyze or incubate new initiatives
Establish Shared Measurement Practices: Collect, analyze, interpret, and report data; Catalyze or develop shared measurement systems; Provide technical assistance for building partners’ data capacity
Build public will: Build public will, consensus, and commitment; Create a sense of urgency and articulate a call to action; Support community member engagement activities
Advance policy: Advocate for an aligned policy agenda
Mobilize Funding: Mobilize and align public and private funding to support goals
Advance Policy
Mobilize Funding
Backbone leaders aim to maintain balance between coordinating and ensuring accountability while staying behind the scenes to establish collective ownership
Source: FSG Interviews and Analysis

28. Many Types of Agencies Can Serve as Backbones
Types of Organizations
Examples
Funders
New Nonprofit
Existing Nonprofit
Government Agency or School District
Shared Across Multiple Organizations
Steering Committee Driven

29. The Work of the Backbone is Often Less Visible
“(The backbone is) kind of like the quarterback—doesn’t end up in the end zone, but they’re the ones handing it off, making a pass or calling a different play if the defense looks different.”
“I’m at a lot of events with people in the know who don’t understand what these backbones do. But they are doing what they are supposed to do—the work behind the scenes. They both fill a role that, if it weren’t for them, no one would be pushing certain items.”
“They are an umbrella that can say, ‘this is an issue, let’s address it together.’”
“(The backbone) has also formed a bridge between early childhood agencies, corporate leaders, and funders.”
Source: FSG Interviews and Analysis

30. Considerations for Launching any Collective Impact Effort
Collective Impact: Readiness for Collective Impact
Is the Right Infrastructure in Place?
Credible Champions / Catalysts exist to drive CI discussions
Neutral Convener exists and is looked to by the community
Backbone Support Structure exists or key staff positions can be filled
Are the Conditions Ripe for Change?
Significant resources and attention are already focused on addressing the problem
Existing collaborative efforts are present and can be taken to the “next level;” tools and processes are already in place
Funders are aligned (public and private) and willing to financially support and partner on the effort
Potential exists to engage a board and cross-sector sets of community players
Internal and external circumstances point to issue “ripeness” or urgency
The broader community holds a shares this sense of urgency
Interest exists or efforts are underway to study the problem, key players are involved, and / or evidence-based strategies have already been developed

31. Returning to the One Word Exercise
Think of one word that now describes how you are feeling about collaborating for Collective Impact.
Write that word on a post-it and share it with a colleague.

32. Thank You To learn more about Collective Impact, visit
our new online forum:

33. Back Up Slides

34. Collective Impact in NY Involved 5 Elements
Five Elements of Collective Impact
Collective Impact in NY Involved 5 Elements 1
Common Agenda
Common understanding of the problem
Shared vision for change 2
Shared Measurement
Collecting data and measuring results
Focus on performance management
Shared accountability 3
Mutually Reinforcing Activities
Differentiated approaches
Coordination through joint plan of action 4
Continuous Communication
Consistent and open communication
Focus on building trust 5
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 and Analysis

35. New York Juvenile Justice System Actors
Source: FSG interviews and analysis; State of NY Juvenile Justice Advisory Group, “State of NY, 2009–2011: Three-Year Comprehensive State Plan for the JJ and Delinquency Prevention Formula Grant Program.”

36. New York’s Juvenile Justice Landscape Map
Family and Community Engagement
Assessment
Arrest
Probation
Intake/ Detention
Decision to Prosecute
Family Court Process
Disposition Outcomes
Initial Referral/ Police Contact
Connections to Education, Mental Health and Substance Abuse,
and Child Welfare Systems and Organizations
Reentry and Aftercare Services
Integration into the Community
Source: FSG interviews and analysis; State of NY Juvenile Justice Advisory Group, “State of NY, 2009–2011: Three-Year Comprehensive State Plan for the JJ and Delinquency Prevention Formula Grant Program.”

37. Goals Across the NY Juvenile Justice System
System Governance and Coordination
Goal 2
Effective Continuum of Diversion, Supervision, Treatment, and Confinement
Family and Community Engagement
Connections to Education, Mental Health and Substance Abuse,
and Child Welfare Systems and Organizations
Assessment
Reentry and Aftercare Services
Initial Referral/ Police Contact
Arrest
Probation
Intake/ Detention
Decision to Prosecute
Family Court Process
Disposition Outcomes
Integration into the Community
Goal 3
Goal 4
Accountability of System and Organizations Within the System
Shared Data and Information-Driven Decisions and Policy
Source: FSG interviews and analysis; State of NY Juvenile Justice Advisory Group, “State of NY, 2009–2011: Three-Year Comprehensive State Plan for the JJ and Delinquency Prevention Formula Grant Program.”

38. Collective Impact in Practice: New York Juvenile Justice
The Collective Impact Effort to Reform the NYJJ System Relied Heavily on Close Ties with Policymakers
Some policy changes that the CI effort advocated for were:
Raising the minimum age by which juveniles in the state can be considered adults (from 16 years to 18 years)
Creating a staffed statewide central organizing structure to coordinate organizations and the implementation of strategies and to promote accountability of system actors
Four of the many organizations involved
Aligning of financial incentives for agencies and other youth service organizations to performance on targeted outcomes as appropriate
Realigning New York City’s system for placing juveniles who enter the prison system, to ensure that offenders will be placed closer to home (in conjunction with related policy and funding changes at the state level)
A critical success factor behind this effort is that its backbone organization is housed within the Governor’s office and is chaired by two cabinet heads
Source: FSG Interviews and Analysis

39. Foundation’s Role in Effort
Funder’s Role in CI: Case Example
Case Study: The Tow Foundation Played a Critical Role in a Collective Impact Effort on Juvenile Justice Reform in NY
Overview of Effort
New York State juvenile justice system was largely ineffective, inefficient, and unsafe
Numerous efforts had been tried, but systemic barriers to reform existed
Initial common agenda setting and strategy selection effort spanned ~ 1 / year
Foundation’s Role in Effort
Tow’s involvement built on past experience in juvenile justice reform in Connecticut
Convened diverse system actors to develop a collective vision, set of goals, and strategies to transform the juvenile justice system
Worked with funders (public and private) to catalyze co-funding for strategic planning and backbone support
Staff served on Steering Committee and Working Groups for effort
Impact to
Date
Backbone organization coordinates the actions of cross-sectoral stakeholders
Effort resulted in recommendations that will be incorporated into NYS law (realignment)
For the first time ever, heads of state agencies and across systems meeting regularly to discuss issues
Significant progress toward building an accurate, up to date database of programs and services for justice-involved youth by county
Development of shared data system that will hold the system accountable for both public safety and youth success, as well as inform reform
Source: FSG Interviews and Analysis

40. Franklin County, MA’s Communities that Care Coalition
Franklin County Communities that Care (1 of 2)
Franklin County, MA’s Communities that Care Coalition
Collective Impact Need
Learnings
In 2002 alcohol, tobacco, and drug use among youth became a pressing issue in Franklin County, a rural community
Communities That Care Coalition was built to make rural Franklin County and North Quabbin Region, MA a place for youth to be able to reach full potential and thrive with support from schools, parents and the community
Eight main structures work together to serve the rural population:
(1) 18-member decision-making leadership Council
(2-4) Three 8-person workgroups (Community Norms and Laws, Youth Recognition and Parent Education) which lead the day-to-day work
(5) Regional school health taskforce—representatives from school districts, implementing student surveys and linking workgroups to schools
(6) Community at large
(7-8) Two “co-host” administration groups
The broad Coalition meets at least two times per year while the Council meets on a monthly basis. Annual Teen Health Survey used to measure progress and inform work of the coalition
Coalition is “co-hosted” by Community Action of the Franklin, Hampshire and North Quabbin Regions and the Community Coalition for Teens, program of Franklin Regional Council of Governments. Both groups share administrative duties including running meetings, communication, and media advocacy
15% point declines in substance abuse in first six years of the coalition's work 1
It is important to communicate to the larger group that all are responsible and it is the whole that will drive impact
Solution and Goal
“Emphasizing this is all of ours, it’s not a separate entity, doesn’t have budget; instead it’s all of us working together that is important.”
Implementation 2
Creating a “collective” ownership of successes instead of “individual successes” helps align groups
“Look to find common goals and objectives so you can share each others’ successes. Each agency’s success leads to more success at other agencies’.” 3
Working groups can play a powerful role in the day-to- day implementation work
Backbone(s)
“We let the real work, the meat and potatoes, the meaningful decisions happen at the work group level.”
Results to Date

41. FSG Helps Leaders Achieve Greater Social Impact
Overview of FSG
FSG Helps Leaders Achieve Greater Social Impact
Consulting
Services
Thought Leadership
Client
Organizations
Corporations:
Foundations:
Nonprofits:
Governments and Multilaterals:
Strategy: Devise clear goals and effective strategies that apply resources to maximum potential
Implementation: Develop and execute action plans that mesh strategy with organizational realities
Organizational Change: Align organizations and operations in support of strategies to ensure maximum social impact
Evaluation: Make strategic decisions and take informed action using evaluation
Coalition Building: Build cross-sector collaborations, unite stakeholders to achieve large-scale collective impact 41