Collective Impact: The “New Normal” in the Greater Cincinnati Region


Published on

A presentation at the "Collective Impact in the Greater Cincinnati Community" event on September 24, 2012 hosted by The Greater Cincinnati Foundation and United Way of Greater Cincinnati

  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Health and arts have also made progress; community development lags behind
  • Collective Impact: The “New Normal” in the Greater Cincinnati Region

    1. 1. Collective Impact: The “New Normal” in the Greater Cincinnati Region Monday, September 24, 2012 United Way of Greater Cincinnati Cincinnati, OH
    2. 2. FSG.ORG Today’s ConversationI. What is Collective Impact? 9:00 – 10:00 AM Break 10:00 – 10:15 AMII. What is Needed for Collective Impact to Succeed? • Measuring Shared Outcomes 10:15 – 10:45 AM • The Value of Backbone Support 10:45 – 11:15 AM • Group Discussion 11:15 AM – 12:00 PMIII. Debrief and Closing 12:00 – 12:30 PM 2 © 2012 FSG
    3. 3. Collective Impact Overview FSG.ORG There Are Several Types of Problems Simple Complicated Complex Sending a Rocket to Raising a Child Baking a Cake the Moon No “right” recipes or protocols “Formulas” needed Right “recipe” essential Outside factors influence Experience built over time and Gives same results every time Experience helps, but doesn’t can be repeated with success guarantees success The social sector traditionally treats problems as simple or complicatedSource: Adapted from “Getting to Maybe” 3 © 2012 FSG
    4. 4. Collective Impact Overview FSG.ORG Traditional Approaches Are Not Solving Our Toughest, and Often Complex, Challenges • Funders select individual grantees • Organizations work separately and compete Isolated Impact • 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 4 © 2012 FSG
    5. 5. Collective Impact Overview FSG.ORG Imagine a Different Approach – Multiple Players Working Together to Solve Complex Issues Isolated Impact • Understand that social problems – and their solutions – arise from interaction of many organizations within larger system • Cross-sector alignment with government, nonprofit, philanthropic and corporate sectors as partners • Organizations actively coordinating their actions and sharing lessons Collective learned Impact • All working toward the same goal and measuring the same things 5 © 2012 FSG
    6. 6. Collective Impact Overview FSG.ORG Five Elements of Collective Impact Common Agenda Shared Measurement Mutually Reinforcing Activities Continuous Communication Backbone Organizations 6 © 2012 FSG
    7. 7. Collective Impact Overview FSG.ORG The Collective Impact Approach Can Apply to Solving Many Complex Social Issues Education Healthcare Homelessness Workforce Development Economic Development Community Development * 7 © 2012 FSG
    8. 8. Collective Impact Overview FSG.ORG Working in Collective Impact Requires a Mindset Shift Adaptive vs. Technical • Supporting common agenda building, information sharing and coordination/ Problem Solving alignment • Allowing answers to come from within No Silver Bullets.… But We • Many small changes implemented in alignment can add up to large scale Do Have Silver Buckshot progress • Creating new incentives to work Credibility vs. Credit collaboratively vs. competitively 8 © 2012 FSG
    9. 9. FSG.ORG Coordination Happens Through Cascading Levels of Linked Collaboration Common Agenda Steering Shared Measures Committee Governance, Vision and Strategy Working Groups Action Planning Backbone Partners Execution Community Members Public WillSource: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews 9 © 2012 FSG
    10. 10. FSG.ORG10 © 2012 FSG
    11. 11. FSG.ORG How Collective Impact Works 1. Achieve a perpetual state of simultaneous planning and doing 2. Allow for the “Shock of the Possible” 3. Pay attention to Relationships • It’s what happens between people, organizations, communities and systems that matters most 4. Listen, listen, listen for how to respond to unanticipated results • Data helps point the way 5. A certain mindset is crucial • Adopt an attitude of “burning patience”File name 11 © 2010 FSG
    12. 12. FSG.ORG Today’s ConversationI. What is Collective Impact? 9:00 – 10:00 AM Break 10:00 – 10:15 AMII. What is Needed for Collective Impact to Succeed? • Measuring Shared Outcomes 10:15 – 10:45 AM • The Value of Backbone Support 10:45 – 11:15 AM • Group Discussion 11:15 AM – 12:00 PMIII. Debrief and Closing 12:00 – 12:30 PM 12 © 2012 FSG
    13. 13. FSG.ORG Shared Measurement is a Critical Piece of Pursuing a Collective Impact Approach Definition Identifying 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  Improved Data Quality  Tracking Progress Toward a Shared Goal  Enabling Coordination and Collaboration  Learning and Course Correction  Catalyzing ActionSource: Breakthroughs in Shared Measurement and Social Impact, FSG, 2009 13 © 2012 FSG
    14. 14. Greater Cincinnati Shared Outcomes Project: Overview FSG.ORG Positive Efforts toward Shared Outcomes and Collective Impact Are Underway across Multiple Sectors in Greater Cincinnati Arts and Culture Community Development Education Health Workforce DevelopmentPlease note that this diagram represents only a sample of collaborative efforts in the Greater Cincinnati Area 14 © 2012 FSG
    15. 15. Review of Progress Toward Shared Outcomes FSG.ORG Five Key Areas Are Crucial for Successful Use of Shared Outcomes Key Features of Shared Outcomes Progress • How strong are collaboration and relationships in the sector? Supportive • What are current dynamics in the sector? Environment • How broad is agreement around common outcome use? Common • Is there a common agenda for progress in the sector? Agenda • How broadly is this common agenda accepted? • How wide is input in the development and selection of outcomes? Outcome • How similar are outcomes currently tracked in the sector? Selection • How do shared outcomes inform learning in the sector? • What is sector capacity to track selected outcomes? Data Collection • Are there concerns about sharing data in the sector? • Is there an existing structure, database or hub for data? • How frequently do stakeholders meet to review shared outcomes? Data Use • How is data used to inform collaboration and activities? • How is data used to inform ongoing evolution of shared outcomes? 15 © 2012 FSG
    16. 16. Shared Outcomes FSG.ORG In Cincinnati, the Education and Workforce Development Sectors Have Made the Most Progress on Shared Outcomes Matrix of Sector Progress Toward Shared Outcomes Supportive Common Outcome Data Environment Agenda Selection Collection Sectors Arts and Culture Community Development Education Health Workforce Development Indicates strong progress Indicates moderate progress Indicates little progress 16 © 2012 FSG
    17. 17. Roadmap for Shared Outcomes Development FSG.ORG A Roadmap for Shared Outcomes Development Can Be Used to Guide Sector Specific Development B. Develop Sector Supportive A. Mobilize Definition & Scope C. Develop Environment Community Common for Shared Stakeholders Agenda Outcomes Common Agenda D. Select E. Develop Common Common Outcome Outcomes Indicators Selection G. Design and F. Develop Data H. Deploy Develop Data Collection Tools System in Data Collection and Standards Sector Collection System or Hub I. Institutionalize J. Evaluate & K Use Data to Data Use Opportunities for Modify System Inform Practice Learning (ongoing) 17 © 2012 FSG
    18. 18. Greater Cincinnati Shared Outcomes Project FSG.ORG Our Research Indicates Significant Progress in Several Sectors and Interest in Cross-Sector Collaboration Preliminary Findings from Cincinnati • There is strong progress, albeit with some variation, in Cincinnati sectors toward effective use of shared outcomes • There are significant areas of potential overlap between sectors, and interest among sector representatives in exploring possibilities • Outcomes identified or agreed upon by multiple sectors include the following (most are in education and workforce development): • Kindergarten readiness • Hourly wage, expected hours • Standardized state • Degree or credential achievement test scores obtained • High school graduation rates • Job type • ACT test scores • Job retention • Job placement • Job advancement • Outcomes in other sectors range more widely, although there is increasing focus in the health sector on outcomes around preventive screening, diabetes, obesity, tobacco use, and high blood pressure 18 © 2012 FSG
    19. 19. Greater Cincinnati Shared Outcomes Project FSG.ORG Recommendations for Shared Outcomes Within and Across Sectors Emerged from Our Work Preliminary Recommendations • Continue to support (“stay the course”) those sectors that show high agreement on priority outcomes (Education, Workforce Development, Arts) • Facilitate further consensus building in emerging sectors (Health and Community Development); consider development of shared outcomes for segments of these sectors • Fund data system development, data collection training and maintenance, and data use and learning for Education, Workforce Development, and Arts • Incentivize as well as hold accountable partners to develop and use data 19 © 2012 FSG
    20. 20. Greater Cincinnati Shared Outcomes Project FSG.ORG Cincinnati Funders Play an Important Role in Advancing the Development and Use of Shared Outcomes Recommended Next Steps for Funders • Funders should consider their priority interests and program areas of work and identify opportunities to support the use of shared outcomes • Funders should estimate funding requirements for activities, such as incentivizing as well as holding accountable, partner organizations to use shared outcomes • Funders should consider investing in key partner organizations (such as backbone organizations) to build their capacities to support shared outcome data infrastructures • Funders should also continue to serve in key roles as conveners as well as to invest in building consensus and supporting continuous learning 20 © 2012 FSG
    21. 21. FSG.ORG Today’s ConversationI. What is Collective Impact? 9:00 – 10:00 AM Break 10:00 – 10:15 AMII. What is Needed for Collective Impact to Succeed? • Measuring Shared Outcomes 10:15 – 10:45 AM • The Value of Backbone Support 10:45 – 11:15 AM • Group Discussion 11:15 AM – 12:00 PMIII. Debrief and Closing 12:00 – 12:30 PM 21 © 2012 FSG
    22. 22. Key Learning FSG.ORG It Is Not Always Easy to See the Value of Backbone Organizations’ Work The Role of Backbone Organizations Is Often Described with a Metaphor… • ―(They are) 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.‘‖ • ―They serve as the voice for early care and education and bringing issues to the tables to funders that may not otherwise be heard.‖ • ―(The backbone) has also formed a bridge between early childhood agencies, corporate leaders, and funders.‖Source: FSG interviews 22 © 2012 FSG
    23. 23. Theory of Change FSG.ORG Effective Backbone Organization Leadership Is Critical to Collective Impact SuccessWhy we collectively The change we Early indications are taking What we are doing collectively hope to that our activities action to address the see if we are will lead to change (Needs / issue successful (BackboneAssumptions and (Activities) (Initiative Outcomes) Goals) Outcomes) Guide Vision Support Alignment Isolated Impact Shared Measurement Partners Build Public Will Initiative Advance Policy Community Mobilize Funding 23 © 2012 FSG
    24. 24. Backbone Activities FSG.ORG Backbone Organizations in Greater Cincinnati Are Supporting Collective Impact Initiatives in Six Key Ways Guide Vision and Strategy Support Aligned Activities Establish Shared Measurement Practices Build Public Will Advance Policy Mobilize Funding 24 © 2012 FSG
    25. 25. Evaluation Design Process FSG.ORG The Evaluation Design Process Took Place Over 3 Months Working Group 16 Activity Areas Survey Discussions Instruments 27 Outcome Indicators Individual and aggregated baseline reports on Backbone Effectiveness 25 © 2012 FSG
    26. 26. Key Learning FSG.ORG Backbone Organizations Were Assessed Against Six Function Areas Key Findings • Common strengths: Guiding vision and strategy, supporting aligned activities, and establishing shared measurement practices • Common challenges: External communications, building public will, and advancing policy • Areas for increased attention: Building public will, advancing policy, assisting partners with data capacity 26 © 2012 FSG
    27. 27. Key Learning FSG.ORG When Comparing the Backbone Organizations, Organization-Specific Challenges Add Nuance Among the backbone organizations… Phase of Collective Phase I Phase II Phase III Initiate Action Organize Sustain Action & Impact Initiative for Impact Impact Organizational Capacity $$$ Scope of the Vision and Strategy and / or Vs. Geographic Reach Organizational Structure/ Parent Organizations 27 © 2012 FSG
    28. 28. Key Learning FSG.ORG Effective Backbone Leaders Share Common Characteristics Stakeholders describe backbone organization leaders as: Visionary Results-Oriented Collaborative, Relationship Builder Focused, but Adaptive Charismatic and Influential Communicator Politic Humble ―Someone who has a big picture perspective—[who] understands how the pieces fit together, is sensitive to the dynamics, and is energetic and passionate.‖Source: FSG interviews 28 © 2012 FSG
    29. 29. Opportunities for Backbone Alignment FSG.ORG Backbone Organizations and Collective Impact Initiatives Can Work Together for Greater Cincinnati Opportunities for • Backbone organizations could not just learn from Alignment each other, but actively work more closely together • Backbone organizations could align Data and Shared Measurement for the community Collaborating as Backbones… • Backbone organizations could align Funders on a community-wide vision Or Collaborating • Backbones could collaborate on areas such as on Issues… College to Career or Early Childhood EducationSource: FSG interviews 29 © 2012 FSG
    30. 30. Group Discussion FSG.ORG In Small Groups, We Will Discuss the Collective Impact Model and the Role of the Backbone Organization Join a group that is discussing a topic you are most interested in: Discussion Questions • Common Agenda • What do you see as the benefits to the community in taking a collective impact approach? • Shared Outcomes • In your table‘s topic area, what challenges • Mutually Reinforcing exist that prevent the community from being Activities able to make progress in this area? • Continuous • What role does the backbone organization Communication play in advancing work in this topic area? • What should happen next? Given your role in the sector, how do you participate? 30 © 2012 FSG
    31. 31. FSG.ORG Today’s ConversationI. What is Collective Impact? 9:00 – 10:00 AM Break 10:00 – 10:15 AMII. What is Needed for Collective Impact to Succeed? • Measuring Shared Outcomes 10:15 – 10:45 AM • The Value of Backbone Support 10:45 – 11:15 AM • Group Discussion 11:15 AM – 12:00 PMIII. Debrief and Closing 12:00 – 12:30 PM 31 © 2012 FSG
    32. 32. FSG.ORGAppendix 32 © 2012 FSG
    33. 33. Greater Cincinnati Shared Outcomes Project FSG.ORG The Shared Outcomes Steering Committee Includes Key Funders and Representatives from Greater Cincinnati Strategy Refresh Strategy Refresh Steering Committee Members • Mike Baker, United Way of Greater Cincinnati • E. Kelly Firesheets, The Health Foundation of Greater Cincinnati • Teri Haught, ArtsWave • Eric Rademacher, The Institute for Policy Research, University of Cincinnati • Shiloh Turner, The Greater Cincinnati Foundation 33 © 2012 FSG
    34. 34. Greater Cincinnati Backbone Effectiveness Evaluation FSG.ORG The Backbone Effectiveness Working Group Includes Representatives from Key Backbone Organizations and Greater Cincinnati Foundation Strategy Refresh Strategy Refresh Working Group Members • Stephanie Byrd, Success By 6 • Greg Landsman, Strive Partnership • Kathy Merchant, Greater Cincinnati Foundation • Ross Meyer, Partners for a Competitive Workforce • Bill Scheyer, Vision 2015 • Kathy Schwab, LISC • Mary Stagaman, Agenda 360 • Shiloh Turner, Greater Cincinnati Foundation • Kara Williams, Vision 2015 34 © 2012 FSG
    35. 35. Activities and Backbone Outcomes FSG.ORG Our Backbone Working Group Helped Define 16 Common Activity Areas Guide Vision and • Build a common understanding of the problem that needs to be addressed Strategy • Provide strategic guidance to develop a common agenda; serve as a thought leader / standard bearer for the initiative Support Aligned Ensure mutually reinforcing activities take place, i.e., Activities • Coordinate and facilitate partners’ continuous communication and collaborative work • Convene partners and key external stakeholders • Catalyze or incubate new initiatives or collaborations • Provide technical assistance to build management and administrative capacity (e.g., coaching and mentoring, as well as providing training and fundraising support) • Create paths for, and recruit, new partners so they become involved • Seek out opportunities for alignment with other efforts Establish Shared • Collect, analyze, interpret, and report data Measurement • Catalyze or develop shared measurement systems Practices • Provide technical assistance for building partners’ data capacity Build Public Will Build public will, consensus and commitment: • Frame the problem to create a sense of urgency and articulate a call to action • Support community member engagement activities • Produce and manage communications (e.g., news releases, reports) Advance Policy Advocate for an aligned policy agenda Mobilize Funding Mobilize and align public and private funding to support initiative’s goals 35 © 2012 FSG
    36. 36. Activities and Backbone Outcomes FSG.ORG The Working Group Also Identified Several Indicators of Backbone Outcomes Guide Vision and • Partners accurately describe the common agenda • Partners publicly discuss / advocate for common agenda goals Strategy • Partners’ individual work is increasingly aligned with common agenda • Board members and key leaders increasingly look to backbone organization for initiative support, strategic guidance and leadership Support Aligned • Partners articulate their role in the initiative • Relevant stakeholders are engaged in the initiative Activities • Partners communicate and coordinate efforts regularly, with, and independently of, backbone • Partners report increasing levels of trust with one another • Partners increase scope / type of collaborative work • Partners improve quality of their work • Partners improve efficiency of their work • Partners feel supported and recognized in their work Establish Shared • Shared data system is in development • Partners understand the value of shared data Measurement • Partners have robust / shared data capacity Practices • Partners make decisions based on data • Partners utilize data in a meaningful way Build Public Will • Community members are increasingly aware of the issue(s) • Community members express support for the initiative • Community members feel empowered to engage in the issue(s) • Community members increasingly take action Advance Policy • Target audience (e.g., influencers and policymakers) is increasingly aware of the initiative • Target audiences advocate for changes to the system aligned with initiative goals • Public policy is increasingly aligned with initiative goals Mobilize Funding • Funders are asking nonprofits to align to initiative goals • Funders are redirecting funds to support initiative goals • New resources from public and private sources are being contributed to partners and initiative 36 © 2012 FSG
    37. 37. FSG.ORG There are Three Phases to Developing a Shared Measurement System Developing a Shared Measurement System 1 2 3 Design Develop Deploy • Shared vision for the • Development of web- • Learning forums and system and its relation to based platform and continuous broader goals, theory of data collection tools improvement change or roadmap • Refinement and • Ongoing infrastructure • View of current state of testing of platform support knowledge and data and tools • Improve system based • Governance and • Staffing for data on a pilot, review, organization for management and refinement, and structured participation synthesis ongoing evaluation of usability and impact • Identification of metrics, data collection approach, including confidentiality/ transparencySource: FSG Analysis 37 © 2012 FSG
    38. 38. FSG.ORG Key Success Factors in the Development of Shared Measurement Systems Effective Strong leadership and substantial funding (multi-year) Relationship with Funders Independence from funders in devising indicators, managing system Broad engagement during design by organizations, with clear Broad and expectations about confidentiality/transparency Open Engagement Voluntary participation open to all organizations Infrastructure Effective use of web-based technology for Deployment Ongoing staffing for training, facilitation, reviewing data accuracy Pathways for Testing and continually improving through feedback Learning and Improvement Facilitated process for participants to share data and results, learn, and better coordinate effortsSource: Breakthroughs in Shared Measurement and Social Impact, FSG, 2009 38 © 2012 FSG
    39. 39. FSG.ORG Traditional Approaches Are Not Solving Our Toughest Social Problems Isolated Impact Collective Impact • Funders select individual grantees • Nonprofits work separately and • All players work toward the same compete goal and measuring the same things • Evaluation attempts to isolate a particular organization’s impact • Cross-sector alignment occurs, with government and corporate • Large scale change is assumed to sectors as essential partners depend on scaling organizations • Organizations actively coordinate • Corporate and government sectors their action and share lessons are often disconnected from learned foundations and non-profits Imagine a different approach – Multiple players working together to solve complex issuesSource: Stanford Social Innovation Review: Collective Impact, Winter 2011 39 © 2012 FSG
    40. 40. Organization Introductions FSG.ORG Greater Cincinnati Has a Strong History of Collaborative and Innovative Efforts to Tackle Social Challenges Thriving People Vibrant Places Educational Success, Health & Wellness, Cultural Vibrancy, Environmental Stewardship, Economic Opportunity Job Creation, Strong Communities place matters 40 © 2012 FSG
    41. 41. Collective Impact: Overview FSG.ORG Collective Impact Is a Unique and Differentiated Approach to Bringing Actors Across Sectors Together Type of Definition Collaboration Long-term commitments by a group of important Collective Impact actors from different sectors to a common agenda for More Elements of Collective Impact Initiatives solving a specific social problem Funder Groups of funders interested in supporting the same Collaboratives issue who pool their resources Partnerships formed between government and private Public-Private sector organizations to deliver specific services or Partnerships benefits Multi-Stakeholder Voluntary activities by stakeholders from different Initiatives sectors around a common theme Groups of individuals or organizations fluidly Social Sector connected through purposeful relationships, whether Networks formal or informal It is distinct from other forms of collaboration 41 © 2012 FSG