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

1. Collective Impact: The “New Normal”
in the Greater Cincinnati Region
Monday, September 24, 2012
United Way of Greater Cincinnati
Cincinnati, OH

2. FSG.ORG
Today’s Conversation
I. What is Collective Impact? 9:00 – 10:00 AM
Break 10:00 – 10:15 AM
II. 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 PM
III. Debrief and Closing 12:00 – 12:30 PM
2 © 2012 FSG

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 complicated
Source: Adapted from “Getting to Maybe” 3 © 2012 FSG

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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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 Will
Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews 9 © 2012 FSG

10. FSG.ORG
10 © 2012 FSG

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. FSG.ORG
Today’s Conversation
I. What is Collective Impact? 9:00 – 10:00 AM
Break 10:00 – 10:15 AM
II. 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 PM
III. Debrief and Closing 12:00 – 12:30 PM
12 © 2012 FSG

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 Action
Source: Breakthroughs in Shared Measurement and Social Impact, FSG, 2009 13 © 2012 FSG

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
Development
Please note that this diagram represents only a sample of collaborative efforts in the Greater Cincinnati Area
14 © 2012 FSG

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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. FSG.ORG
Today’s Conversation
I. What is Collective Impact? 9:00 – 10:00 AM
Break 10:00 – 10:15 AM
II. 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 PM
III. Debrief and Closing 12:00 – 12:30 PM
21 © 2012 FSG

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. Theory of Change FSG.ORG
Effective Backbone Organization Leadership Is Critical
to Collective Impact Success
Why 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
(Backbone
Assumptions 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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 Education
Source: FSG interviews 29 © 2012 FSG

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. FSG.ORG
Today’s Conversation
I. What is Collective Impact? 9:00 – 10:00 AM
Break 10:00 – 10:15 AM
II. 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 PM
III. Debrief and Closing 12:00 – 12:30 PM
31 © 2012 FSG

32. FSG.ORG
Appendix
32 © 2012 FSG

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. 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. 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. 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. 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/
transparency
Source: FSG Analysis 37 © 2012 FSG

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 efforts
Source: Breakthroughs in Shared Measurement and Social Impact, FSG, 2009 38 © 2012 FSG

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 issues
Source: Stanford Social Innovation Review: Collective Impact, Winter 2011 39 © 2012 FSG

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. 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