Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Making The Connection Workshop Presentation 11 28 2007
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Making The Connection Workshop Presentation 11 28 2007

818
views

Published on

The role of social networking and cluster analysis in the nonprofit sector and how foundations can use this information to improve the effectiveness of their grantmaking.

The role of social networking and cluster analysis in the nonprofit sector and how foundations can use this information to improve the effectiveness of their grantmaking.

Published in: Economy & Finance, Technology

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
818
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
16
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • Transcript

    • 1. Making the Connection: How Provider Dialogue and Network Clusters Can Spur Successful Collaboration 2007 Annual Nonprofit Sector Research Conference Concurrent Workshop #1 Thursday, November 29 th , 2007
    • 2. Meet Our Collaborative Research Team
      • Tim Weidemann
        • Fairweather Consulting brings expertise in cluster analysis, along with experience in large-scale human services collaborations
        • Using a variety of analytic techniques, Fairweather Consulting provided the quantitative tools to identify new ways to think about collaboration
      • Chris Sweeney, George Heinitsh, Kevin Perkey
        • 3rc brings technical expertise to assist with Geographic Information Systems (GIS) mapping
        • Through the Information Commons, 3rc provides the raw data on human services programs and agencies that formed the basis for our analysis
      • Diana Bucco, Sam Reiman
        • The Forbes Funds, through its Tropman Research Agenda, is the sponsor of this research.
        • The Forbes Funds played an important role as ‘convener’ of the dialogue on collaboration amongst nonprofit providers.
    • 3. Previous Report: Identify Collaboration Opportunities Through Service Clusters
      • In 2005, The Forbes Funds commissioned an initial effort to find opportunities to improve efficiency and effectiveness through ‘clustering’ of nonprofits
      • Our research builds on this earlier effort, expanding on the concept of ‘clusters’ to find out what kinds of relationships between providers inspire successful collaborations
      Source: “Service Clustering: Building Cohesive Public Service Capacity,” the Hill Group, 2005 Tropman Reports How can we increase the number of successful human service collaborations.
    • 4. Ice Breaker: New Ways to Think About Data 2007 Annual Nonprofit Sector Research Conference Concurrent Workshop #1 Thursday, November 29 th , 2007
    • 5. From Collaboration to Clusters and Back Again…
      • Setting the Context
      • Our Research Questions
        • What can nonprofits and funders do to encourage more successful collaboration?
      • Our Research Methodology
        • What is collaboration?
        • What are clusters?
      • Research Findings
        • What makes collaboration work?
        • How can provider dialogue and network clusters spur collaboration?
      • Recommendations
        • Action steps and recommendations for providers and funders
      • Discussion
      Research Questions Methodology Findings Recommendations 1 2 3 4
    • 6. Research Questions: How Can We Help Providers and Funders Maximize the Results of Collaboration? 1 2 3 4
    • 7. Some Candid Questions, And The Basis of Our Research Effort
      • How many of you are always right?
      • How many of you are always wrong?
      • How many of you are right sometimes and wrong sometimes?
      • How many of you seek out ways to be right more often?
      1 2 3 4
    • 8. Methodology Step 1: Define The Terms ‘Collaboration’ and ‘Cluster
      • Collaboration is a well-defined, mutually beneficial relationship between 2 or more organizations that includes:
        • A commitment to shared relationships and goals
        • A jointly developed structure with shared responsibility
        • Mutual authority and accountability for success
        • Sharing of resources and rewards
      • A cluster is a group where each member shares some common trait with other members.
        • Vague definition – depends on ‘common trait’
        • Only some ‘common traits’ are relevant for collaboration
        • Examples: Geographical clusters, service clusters
        • Finding clusters requires analysis of data – can’t ‘eyeball’ it
      1 2 3 4
    • 9. Methodology Step 2: What’s Already Been Said About Collaboration and Clusters?
      • Why do organizations collaborate?
        • To fill a need not addressed by any one organization that draws on the unique focus of many
        • To meet funding requirements
        • To achieve cost savings that can be reallocated to program activities
      • What makes collaboration work?
        • Environment
        • Membership Characteristics
        • Process and Structure
        • Communication
        • Purpose
        • Resources
      • What role do clusters play in fostering collaboration?
        • Theory: organizations are more likely to collaborate with agencies with which they are clustered
      Source: Collaboration: What Makes It Work, Second Edition 1 2 3 4
    • 10. Methodology Step 3: Gather Lessons Learned from Successful Collaborations
      • Participating Agencies
        • Jewish Community Center (AgeWell Collaborative)
        • Jewish Family & Children’s Service of Pittsburgh (AgeWell Collaborative)
        • Family Services of Western Pennsylvania (multiple projects)
        • Girl Scouts Trillium Council (Multi-Council shared IT project)
        • CONTACT Pittsburgh (Centralized Call Center Effort)
      • Discussion Points
        • Choosing collaborators and establishing the collaboration
        • Maintaining and concluding collaboration
        • Future opportunities for collaboration
      1 2 3 4
    • 11. Methodology Step 4: Identify a Select Group of Providers for Further Analysis 1 2 3 4 Allegheny County has thousands of providers… Youth Housing 272 Agencies Which ones serve critical needs or priority populations? Which types have sufficient data for analysis? Which ones seem ‘ready’ to engage in a discussion about collaboration? Youth Workforce 92 Agencies
    • 12. Methodology Step 5: Convene a Forum for Discussion and Dialogue
      • What are the factors that have the greatest potential to motivate collaboration?
      • What role can collaboration play in addressing your clients’ needs?
      • What are the barriers that prevent collaboration, and can they be diminished or removed?
      Youth Workforce Focus Group Youth Workforce Focus Group Combined Focus Group Allegheny Intermediate Unit, Allegheny Conference on Community Development, Bloomfield-Garfield Corp, Communities in Schools of Pgh – Allegheny, Eastside Neighborhood Employment Center, Three Rivers Workforce Investment Board, Urban Youth Action, YouthWorks Addison Behavioral Care, Inc., Auberle, Circle C Youth and Family Services, FamilyLinks, Garfield Jubilee, Gwen's Girls Inc., Holy Family Institute, Pressley Ridge Addison Behavioral Care, Allegheny Conference, AIU, Auberle, Bloomfield-Garfield, Circle C, Communities in Schools of Pgh, Eastside Neighborhood Employment Center, FamilyLinks, Garfield Jubilee, Gwen's Girls, Holy Family Institute, Pressley Ridge, Three Rivers WIB, Urban Youth Action, YouthWorks 1 2 3 4
    • 13. Methodology Step 6: Define ‘Common Traits,’ Analyze Data to Identify Clusters
      • Synthesize lessons learned and key success factors to identify the ‘common traits’ that matter
      • Identify data sources and review the available data
      • Cleanse, combine and prepare the data for analysis
      • Identify clusters among our study group
      1 2 3 4
    • 14. Findings: What does it take to create and sustain successful collaborations?
      • 60% of Campos Survey respondents said that some of their collaborations have failed
      • Lack of funds, staff, leadership are some of the most frequently cited barriers to success
      • Collaboration is often seen as competing with other priorities for limited funds and staff time
      Collaboration isn’t as easy as it looks 1 2 3 4 F2.1 Making collaboration work involves overcoming ‘inertia,’ which requires up-front investment F2.2 Funders underestimate the challenges involved in collaboration F2.3 Awareness and trust among agencies are critical precursors to successful collaboration F2.4 The value of collaboration is not well understood by providers and their stakeholders F2.5 To be successful, nonprofit leaders need training about collaboration tools and techniques
    • 15. Findings: What does it take to create and sustain successful collaborations?
      • When funders require it, collaboration might not be genuine
      • Some collaborations look good on paper, but don’t work in reality
      • Funders don’t always circle back to see if collaborations succeed
      Collaboration can’t be forced 1 2 3 4 F2.1 Making collaboration work involves overcoming ‘inertia,’ which requires up-front investment F2.2 Funders underestimate the challenges involved in collaboration F2.3 Awareness and trust among agencies are critical precursors to successful collaboration F2.4 The value of collaboration is not well understood by providers and their stakeholders F2.5 To be successful, nonprofit leaders need training about collaboration tools and techniques
    • 16. Findings: What does it take to create and sustain successful collaborations?
      • Successful collaborations are built on strong existing relationships
      • Mutual understanding, respect, trust are top success factors
      • 25% said “lack of awareness of partners” was a major barrier
      Collaboration requires a foundation of awareness, understanding and trust 1 2 3 4 F2.1 Making collaboration work involves overcoming ‘inertia,’ which requires up-front investment F2.2 Funders underestimate the challenges involved in collaboration F2.3 Awareness and trust among agencies are critical precursors to successful collaboration F2.4 The value of collaboration is not well understood by providers and their stakeholders F2.5 To be successful, nonprofit leaders need training about collaboration tools and techniques
    • 17. Findings: What does it take to create and sustain successful collaborations?
      • Funders seem focused on increased efficiency as value proposition
      • Successful providers haven’t expected or achieved cost reductions
      • Providers are motivated by ability to expand services, access funding
      A disconnect about the costs and benefits makes collaboration more difficult 1 2 3 4 F2.1 Making collaboration work involves overcoming ‘inertia,’ which requires up-front investment F2.2 Funders underestimate the challenges involved in collaboration F2.3 Awareness and trust among agencies are critical precursors to successful collaboration F2.4 The value of collaboration is not well understood by providers and their stakeholders F2.5 To be successful, nonprofit leaders need training about collaboration tools and techniques
    • 18. Findings: What does it take to create and sustain successful collaborations?
      • Providers don’t have a consistent definition of the term “collaboration”
      • Of those who haven’t collaborated, 30% need more info on how
      • “ I thought I knew how to collaborate…but I need to learn more”
      You wouldn’t try to climb a mountain without the right equipment 1 2 3 4 F2.1 Making collaboration work involves overcoming ‘inertia,’ which requires up-front investment F2.2 Funders underestimate the challenges involved in collaboration F2.3 Awareness and trust among agencies are critical precursors to successful collaboration F2.4 The value of collaboration is not well understood by providers and their stakeholders F2.5 To be successful, nonprofit leaders need training about collaboration tools and techniques
    • 19. Findings: What are the motivating factors that lead providers to collaborate?
      • Collaboration is the “result of a strategy that emphasizes partnership” as a way to increase your organization’s ability to achieve its mission
      • Collaboration is a way to overcome barriers to client success
      • This seems to be the most popular motivator for providers
      It’s about expanding service, not reducing cost 1 2 3 4 F3.1 Collaboration expands the reach of involved agencies to under-served locations or populations F3.2 Collaboration improves operating efficiency by reducing overhead and focusing on core competencies F3.3 External pressure from regulators, funders, and other stakeholders forces agencies to collaborate
    • 20. Findings: What are the motivating factors that lead providers to collaborate?
      • Common success stories involve sharing space, staff, other resources
      • This assumption was the basis of the 2005 Tropman Report and is the model that usually motivates private sector firms
      • This seems to be the most frequently cited motivator in the literature
      It’s about saving money that can be redirected to programs 1 2 3 4 F3.1 Collaboration expands the reach of involved agencies to under-served locations or populations F3.2 Collaboration improves operating efficiency by reducing overhead and focusing on core competencies F3.3 External pressure from regulators, funders, and other stakeholders forces agencies to collaborate
    • 21. Findings: What are the motivating factors that lead providers to collaborate?
      • “ Real Collaboration…should not be inspired by a grant opportunity”
      • Providers suggest that collaboration is a common response to RFPs
      • Other stakeholders (e.g. school districts) are requiring collaboration
      Forced collaboration arises from a disconnect about the costs and benefits 1 2 3 4 F3.1 Collaboration expands the reach of involved agencies to under-served locations or populations F3.2 Collaboration improves operating efficiency by reducing overhead and focusing on core competencies F3.3 External pressure from regulators, funders, and other stakeholders forces agencies to collaborate
    • 22. A Digression: Which of These Things…Form a Cluster? Same Color Same Function Same Shape Relationships Between Pairs Of Objects Define the Relationship That Matters 1 2 3 4
    • 23. Findings: Geographic Clusters Are Easy To Understand, But Do They Really ‘Predict’ Collaboration? F4.1 Clusters based on geographical proximity can be a proxy for other collaboration-supporting traits F4.2 Clusters based on service overlap suggest a shared vision that can increase the chances of success F4.3 Clusters based on common board membership identify providers that have existing links to build on F4.4 Clusters based on past collaboration and awareness show areas of great promise and great need Co-location might mean similar clients and a shared collaboration vision Open, frequent communication is more likely, and is a key to success But, providers don’t need to be close together in order to collaborate… 1 2 3 4
    • 24. Findings: Is Service Overlap A Sign of Common Ground or Signal of Competition? F4.1 Clusters based on geographical proximity can be a proxy for other collaboration-supporting traits F4.2 Clusters based on service overlap suggest a shared vision that can increase the chances of success F4.3 Clusters based on common board membership identify providers that have existing links to build on F4.4 Clusters based on past collaboration and awareness show areas of great promise and great need Service overlap suggests that providers see eye to eye on key issues Similar services suggests mutual understanding, respect and trust But, service overlap might also signal potential competition… And how do you measure service overlap? 1 2 3 4
    • 25. Findings: Providers Are Not Like Apples, Oranges and Rubber Balls…They Interact With Each Other! F4.1 Clusters based on geographical proximity can be a proxy for other collaboration-supporting traits F4.2 Clusters based on service overlap suggest a shared vision that can increase the chances of success F4.3 Clusters based on common board membership identify providers that have existing links to build on F4.4 Clusters based on past collaboration and awareness show areas of great promise and great need Shared board members can be a ‘bridge’ to bring providers together Prior link between providers is an important precursor to collaboration Board often plays an important leadership role in collaboration 1 2 3 4
    • 26. Findings: Past Success Can Point to Future Success (No Matter What Hume Said) F4.1 Clusters based on geographical proximity can be a proxy for other collaboration-supporting traits F4.2 Clusters based on service overlap suggest a shared vision that can increase the chances of success F4.3 Clusters based on common board membership identify providers that have existing links to build on F4.4 Clusters based on past collaboration and awareness show areas of great promise and great need Best ‘predictor’ of future success is past success You can’t collaborate with a provider you don’t know 25% of survey said “lack of awareness” prevents collaboration Lack of past success in some systems means the challenge is even greater 1 2 3 4 Youth Housing – Awareness Network Youth Workforce – Awareness Network Youth Housing – Collaboration Network Youth Workforce – Collaboration Network
    • 27. A Note on ‘Common Traits’ and Clusters: All Are Necessary, None Sufficient
      • Each of the types of clusters discussed plays an important role
      • No one of them is sufficient to really get at what influences collaboration
      • Other types of clusters are likely to be important as well
      • The biggest challenge in identifying clusters is the availability of data
      • Over time, we can refine the list of ‘common traits’ as we learn from experience what works and what doesn’t
      1 2 3 4
    • 28. Findings: These Clusters Identify Agencies That Are Very Close Together 7 2 3 4 6 1 2 3 4 Geographic Clusters, Level 1 (8 Clusters, Minimum Distance = 0.10 mi.) Cluster 1
      • Career & Workforce Development Center - East
      • Concerned Citizens' Community Creation Center
      • East Side Community Collaborative - YMCA Pgh
      • Homewood Brushton Family Support Center
      • Operation Better Block
      Cluster 2
      • AC SPOC (Single Point of Contact) Program
      • PA Community & Economic Development
      • PA Human Relations Commission
      • PA Public Welfare Dept., AC Public Assist.Ofc
      • PA Vocational Rehabilitation Office (OVR
      Cluster 3
      • Adagio Health
      • Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Pittsburgh
      • Family Services of Western Pennsylvania
      • Lydia's Place, Inc
      • Neighborhood Legal Svcs Assn - Allegheny Cty
      • Peer Support and Advocacy Network
      Cluster 4
      • Autism & African-Americans
      • Center for Family Excellence, Inc
      • Hill House Association
      • Hill House Association Child Care & Dev Center
      • Pittsburgh Community Services
      Cluster 5
      • Human Services of Western Pennsylvania, Inc
      • McKeesport, City of-Cmnty. Development Dept
      • Mon Yough Community Services, Inc
      • Pittsburgh American Indian Center
      • Steel Valley Opportunities Industrialization Ctr
      Cluster 6
      • Life'sWork of Western PA
      • Miryam's
      • National Student Partnerships
      • Nego Gato, Inc
      • Veterans Leadership Program of Western PA
      Cluster 7
      • AC Area Agency on Aging
      • AC Behavioral Health Office
      • AC Court of Common Pleas Admin Office
      • Allegheny County Dept. of Human Services
      • AC Family Division - Juvenile Section
      • Boy Scouts of America, Greater Pgh Council
      • Communities in Schools of Pgh - Allegheny Co.
      • Neighborhood Housing Services, Inc
      • PGH Citiparks
      • PGH Human Relations Commission
      • Pittsburgh Leadership Foundation
      • PGH Pittsburgh Partnership - WIA
      • American Red Cross Southwestern PA
      • Renewal, Inc
      • Salvation Army, Pittsburgh
      • Student Conservation Association
      • Travelers Aid Society of Pittsburgh
      • Urban League of Greater Pittsburgh, Inc.
      • Urban Youth Action, Inc.
      • YMCA of Greater Pittsburgh
      • YWCA Greater Pittsburgh
    • 29. Findings: These Clusters Identify Loose Groups That Might Be ‘Service Areas’ 1 2 3 4 Geographic Clusters, Level 3 (10 Clusters, Average Intra-Cluster Distance = 1.75 mi.) McKeesport Penn Hills / Wilkinsburg Homestead East End Hill District / Lawrenceville Downtown / North Side South Hills Hazelwood Oakland
    • 30. Findings: These Clusters Identify Providers With Significant Service Overlap
      • Placeholder
      Network Diagram of Service Clusters (Circles = providers, lines = overlap > 6 Info Line elements) Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Diagram created using UCINET: Borgatti, S.P., Everett, M.G. and Freeman, L.C. 2002. Ucinet for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies. 1 2 3 4
    • 31. Findings: These Clusters Identify Providers That Are Linked by Shared Board Members 1 2 3 4 Network Diagram of Board Member Affiliation (Circles = providers, circle size = income, lines = more than 3 shared board members) Parent-Subsidiary Clusters Diagram created using UCINET: Borgatti, S.P., Everett, M.G. and Freeman, L.C. 2002. Ucinet for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies. Other Clusters?
    • 32. Recommendations: Action Steps Can Build Momentum and a Foundation of Success Recommendations: System-Specific Action Steps Action Steps Create a collaborative approach to managing links between employers and Youth Workforce providers Develop a shared, end-to-end ‘older youth’ case management system Create a Housing-Workforce collaboration to build and staff independent living apartments Create a collaborative intermediary that can act as a channel through which employers and workforce providers communicate and gather input Support county- and state-level efforts to build integrated eligibility and case management systems in order to prevent kids from ‘slipping through the cracks.’ Bring together a broad group of housing & workforce providers to build, staff and operate new independent living apartments for older youth. Objectives Stakeholders Youth Workforce State/Local Government Clients Employers Youth Housing These arose during our Focus Group exercises as situations where collaboration could help clients overcome the barriers to success they face 1 2 3 4
    • 33. Recommendations: Providers Should Work To Identify and Overcome Barriers to Collaboration R1.1 R1.2 Recommendations Build mutual awareness and trust at all levels through networking Develop clear explanations of the barriers that prevent successful collaboration R1.3 Leverage shared board members as a ‘bridge’ that links providers to new opportunities for collaboration R1.4 Providers in collaborations should develop ways to measure benefits in terms of efficiency and effectiveness Although networking is sometimes considered a chore, providers with strong networks at all levels (not just Executive Directors) are in a better position to engage in and benefit from collaboration. Collaboration can be difficult, but some providers are successful. In order to get the help they need, providers must clearly articulate the barriers that prevent them from collaborating. Shared board members are common. Some providers may already make use of this connection, but others could use this overlap to learn more about, and possibly collaborate with, new partners. Incentives Collaborations that are driven solely by a funding opportunity rarely succeed, but quantifiable benefits are not usually documented. Successful collaborations should document their outcomes. F2.3 F4.4 F2.1 F2.2 F2.4 F2.5 F2.3 F4.3 F2.4 F3.1 F3.2 F3.3 F4.4 F5.4 F5.3 F#.# = Related research findings F#.# or 1 2 3 4
    • 34. Recommendations: Capacity-Building Is Needed to Give Providers The Tools for Success R2.1 R2.2 Recommendations Issue Management Assistance Grants to support the Action Steps resulting from focus groups Issue a Cohort Grant to create a ‘Collaboration Toolkit’ for executives, board members & staff R2.3 Leverage past and future successes by creating a team of ‘Collaboration Champions’ R2.4 Replicate our research with other providers to assess collaboration readiness and gather ideas, data The Action Steps in our report offer concrete opportunities for collaboration, and through relatively small grants, The Forbes Funds has the opportunity to create important new examples of success. A lack of knowledge prevents success and perpetuates the sense that collaboration isn’t worth the effort. Staff at all levels of the organization contribute and could benefit from tools & techniques. To the extent that The Forbes Funds supports collaborations, the people involved in them should be willing to serve as exemplars, sharing their expertise to encourage and support further successes. Incentives Our research focused on Youth Workforce and Housing providers, but the lessons learned are broadly applicable. More ideas and opportunities are sure to arise as this discussion is expanded. F#.# = Related research findings F#.# or F2.1 F2.4 F2.5 F3.1 F3.2 F2.1 F2.3 F2.4 F2.5 F5.4 F4.4 F5.4 F4.4 F5.4 1 2 3 4
    • 35. Recommendations: Funders and Other Agencies Can Help Create a Culture of Collaboration R3.1 R3.2 Recommendations Incorporate the results of our cluster analyses into the HumanServices.net database Purchase additional data to facilitate future network and cluster analyses R3.3 Create a ‘map’ to identify critical connections that influence the success of collaboration R3.4 Target grantmaking on ‘critical connections’ identified through network analysis and agency input Our research has identified a series of clusters, which may be interesting and useful to providers, funders, and future researchers. To facilitate future use, our results should be included in HS.net. The data requirements of network and cluster analysis are unique, and very little of the data currently available is useful in this type of analysis. Additional data can and should be purchased for future use. Just like a road map, the collaboration map makes it easier to talk about the links between providers and how they influence or predict collaboration. To invest wisely, funders and providers need a map. Incentives Network and cluster analysis are powerful tools that identify collaboration opportunities & challenges. Combined with provider dialogue, they help funders maximize Return on Investment (ROI). F#.# = Related research findings F#.# or F4.2 F4.3 F4.4 F5.2 F5.1 F5.2 F5.3 F5.4 F4.1 F4.2 F4.3 F5.1 F5.1 F5.2 F5.3 F5.4 F5.3 F5.4 F5.2 F5.3 1 2 3 4
    • 36. Questions and Discussion
      • Is “Collaboration” Dead?
      • When Has Collaboration Been Useful to Your Organization?
      • What Do You Perceive as the Costs and Benefits of Collaboration?
      • What Tools Could Help You Collaborate More?
      • Is collaboration as we’ve defined it scarce in the region?
      • Why are there so few examples of successful collaboration?
      • What are the obstacles to successful collaboration?
      • What are the motivating factors that typically drive collaboration in your experience?
    • 37. Making the Connection: How Provider Dialogue and Network Clusters Can Spur Successful Collaboration 2007 Annual Nonprofit Sector Research Conference Concurrent Workshop #1 Thursday, November 29 th , 2007