Presentation to the ABFI on different Funder Collaboration models and how Collective Impact is applied to these funding programs.

1. So you want to change
the world?
Funder Collaborations
ABFI
04-16-2020
1

2. Learning Objectives
Issue: Funders often ask charities to collaborate, but few funders
actually make collaboration a key component of their own funding
model.
1. What are the different collaboration models?
2. How do I evaluate the right “fit” collaboration for my philanthropic
objectives/family foundation?
3. What are the pitfalls to collaboration?
How can the collaborative approach de-duplicate programs and services
within the charitable sector?
What role can funders play in re-shaping the charitable landscape?
2

3. Agenda
Welcome •Introductions and Housekeeping
Isolation
Poll
•How have we been filling our
time?
Handouts •Review
Collaborations
•What are the different types?
•What works best for you?
Together
we can go
further
•What does this look
like? Pro’s and
Con’s? Case Studies
Q&A
3

4. About Us
Karma & Cents Team
• Gena Rotstein, FEA, Philanthropic Advisor
• Richard Ouellette, Managing Director
• Hallie Caplan, Lead Researcher
• Ria Parsbey, Place2Give Foundation Manager
Who we Work With
• Family Businesses & Entrepreneurs
• Philanthropists
• Next Generation Inheritors
Current Client Roster
$200M charitable assets under advisement
4

5. Social Distancing Straw Poll
What interesting times we live in!
5

6. What Levers can
you Pull?
6
Handout

7. The Language of Collaborations
What do we mean when we talk about collaborations?
What are the different perspectives?
7

8. Definitions & Jargon
Collaboration:
• Two or more organizations work
together toward a common goal
• Retain their own individual structure and
decision-making authority
• Mutually beneficial
• Organizations achieve more together
through coordinated or collective action
than they would independently
• Each collaboration is different - may be
formal or informal; time-limited or
ongoing, but typically does not entail a
permanent partnership
8

9. Definitions & Jargon
Alliance:
• Formal commitment to continue shared
or transferred decision-making power
• It does not involve any change to the
corporate structure of the participating
organizations
• An administrative consolidation
• A joint programming
• A joint earned income activity
• A joint advocacy activity
9

10. Definitions & Jargon
Joint Ventures:
• Made up of multiple nonprofit
corporations who consolidate
administrative, programmatic, or
advocacy functions within a jointly
controlled corporation.
• The partner organizations share
governance of the new organization.
• The new organization may be a new
corporate structure or a temporary
network or association.
10

11. Continuum of Collaboration
Exchange
Knowledge
Coordinate
Funding
Co-Invest
Create a
New Entity
or Initiative
Fund the
Funder
Lower Integration Higher Integration
11

12. Discussion #1
All Alliances and Joint Ventures are Collaborations, but not all
Collaborations are Alliances or Joint Ventures.
• What does Collaboration look or feel like to you?
• In what ways have you worked with other Philanthropists?
• What was the most fulfilling and challenging parts of
working with other Philanthropists?
12

13. “Going it Together, We can go Further”
• What does this look like?
• Pro’s & Con’s
• Case Studies
13

14. What do Successful Collaborations Look Like?
Aligned Goals and
Strategies
Thoughtful relationship
building
More than just $$$
Selective Opt-Out
Process
Celebrate
Successes and
Learn from
Failures
14

15. Successful Collaborations
The Process
Chemistry
Do we
click?
Governance
What are
our Rules?
Documentation
Is it
written?
Contracting
Does
everyone
know what is
expected?
15

16. Initial Chemistry Meeting
• Curiosity Conversations - Identifying
players that influence the funding
objectives:
• Co-Conspiriators
• Investors
• Validators
• Believers
• Recipients
• Detractors
16
Successful Collaborations
Step 1a - Chemistry

17. Refined Chemistry Meetings
• Small Group – Working Group/
Steering Committee
• Expertise on the issue
• Brings financial resources to the table
• Have past experience in funding in
this area (not necessarily
collaboratively)
• Positive reputation in the community
• There is ego/values alignment
between the group
17
Successful Collaborations
Step 1b - Chemistry

18. 18
Successful Collaborations
Step 2 - Governance

19. What doesn’t get documented, gets
forgotten
• For internal use and external use
• How and what do you share publicly?
• Who takes the lead with informing grantees?
• How do you do reporting so that each agency
has what they need for their own internal
reviews and public filings?
19
Successful Collaborations
Step 3 - Documentation

20. Contracting
• Identify the rules of engagement
• Opt-out options
• Voting & Decision Making
• Cultural engagement
• Formal structural changes or legal
partnerships
• MoU, MoA, NDA, etc.
• Who will be responsible for what
(operational expenses, etc.)
20
Successful Collaborations
Step 4 - Contracting

21. Collective Impact
Process into Action
21

22. Collective Impact
22

23. Backbone Organization
• Project and Process Manager
• Might be fiscal agent
• Might have initiated conversation
• Has the capacity and authority to
bring people together
• Projects that don’t work may be
attributed to the fact that the
Backbone agency wasn’t actually
the right organization
Collective Impact
Step 1
23

24. Communication
• Set regular touch-ins
• Have collaborative working docs
• Be clear on who speaks publicly
about the project
• Have consistent messaging for
partners to share out
• Document all meetings!
Collective Impact
Step 2
24

25. Mutually Reinforcing Activities
• Map out what each one brings to
the table - See the 9 Levers
Handout
• Highlight any specific things that
the individual organizations may
need to bring back to their own
leadership (progress reports, new
funding ideas, etc.)
• Share funding and reporting
calendars
Collective Impact
Step 3
25

26. Common Progress Measures
• What does success look like? What
are the agreed upon outcomes?
• How do you know you have achieved
it?
• What are the Go/NoGo decision
milestones that need to be agreed
upon?
• What are some of the unintended
consequences that may arise from this
project?
• How are the outcomes benchmarked
against current industry standards?
Collective Impact
Step 4
26

27. Collective Impact
Step 5
27
Common
Agenda
Timeline
Project
Schedule
Rowing in
Same
Direction
Accountability
Recipient Trust

28. Implementation
Focusing understanding where on the continuum of care the Collective sits in
relation to the desired impact.
28

29. Implementation
Evaluating the Collective & Grantees
29

30. Implementation
Where the Rubber Hits the Road
Evaluation
of Proposals
Drafting
Donor
Agreements
Deploying
Capital
Grantee
Project on
Track
Returning
Milestone
Information
to Collective
Evaluate
Projects:
Scale, Pivot,
Cancel
30

31. Implementation
What the CRA Requires
• Create a written agreement with the Intermediary and implement its terms
• Communicate a clear, complete, and detailed description of the activity to
the Intermediary
• Monitor and supervise the activity
• Provide clear, complete, and detailed instructions to the Intermediary on
an ongoing basis
• For agency relationships, segregate funds, as well as maintain separate
books and records
• Make periodic transfers of resources, based on demonstrated performance
• A Charity must maintain a record of steps taken to direct and control the
use of its resources, as part of its books and records, to allow the CRA to
verify that all of the Charity’s resources have been used for its own
activities
31

32. Implementation
Pitfalls of Collaborations
Ego
Inequality
$ Don’t Flow
Taking things for Granted
Leadership Change
Perception of Risk
Collaboration
Failure
32

33. Discussion #2
"Teamwork is the ability to work together toward a common vision. The
ability to direct individual accomplishments toward organizational
objectives. It is the fuel that allows common people to attain
uncommon results." – Andrew Carnegie
• What skills or new learnings do you think that you could gain from
collaborating with other?
• In what ways have you encouraged your grantees to work
collaboratively?
• What advice or tips would you give to others who are possibly looking
at collaboration models?
33

34. Case Study #1
Change Can’t Wait – Municipal, Provincial and Private and Community-based
Funders
34

35. Case Study #1
Mental Health
Various Private Family
Foundations
35

36. Case Study #1
Mental Health
Various Private Family
Foundations
36

37. Case Study #1
By the Numbers
220 Submissions
34 Shortlisted by City
($1.7 M)
26 Proposals
Received
Confirmed
?
The number one reason why not
everyone submitted a full proposal:
COVID interruption
37

38. Case Study #1
Where the Rubber Hits the Road
1. Contracting & Governing Docs
i. Established voting and decision making protocols
ii. MoA drafted and timelines confirmed
iii. Established evaluation metrics to align with application process
2. City put out the call for proposals
i. ~200 applications
ii. 34 shortlisted
iii. 26 applied
3. Funds transferred to City for management
4. Evaluating the proposals
5. City drafted funding agreements
6. Deploy capital  Present
7. Working with Grantees to keep project on track  Over the next 120 Days
8. Optional: Presentations back to the Collective at different milestones to reinforce the process and tap
into expertise
9. Evaluation projects – Scale, Pivot, Cancel  End of 120 Pilot Cycle
38

39. Case Study #1
Levers
Lever Application How It was used in Case
Transfer of Knowledge Looking beyond the inner circle to find how other
organizations addressed accessing & navigating the
mental health space
Chemistry Mtg – sharing knowledge and expertise; Decision making
process – shared information on applicants and landscape
Integrating Existing
Solutions into the Collective
Looking for solutions that similar agencies or
collectives have employed to solve a problem
During the design stage we looked at other collective impact models
for creating our decision and evaluation process
Encourage Cooperation Identify how parties will mutually benefit from a
solution and encourage JV/collaborations between
those orgs
During the evaluation and decision making stages we looked at the
overlapping programs to foster connections between applicants
Youth Engagement Student led projects We paid special attention to projects that were supporting the
Emerging Adult Mental Health space as this is an area that has been
overlooked in the market.
Supporting Social
Entrepreneurs & Businesses
Social change doesn’t just happen within the
charitable sector. Looking at multiple TYPES of
solutions from different corporate structures
allowed for risk diversification.
Applicants represented both for-profit and non-profit agencies as
well as AHS (Gov’t of AB) driven funding requests. We looked at
them all equally.
Supporting Grassroots Orgs Support organizations that are smaller, more nimble
and a single-degree separated from the problem
We made a point of flagging projects that were community driven
or small-agency led to see how they approached the problem
differently from the larger applicants.
39

40. Case Study #2
Rotary Foundation + Gates Foundation = Global Polio Eradication
40

41. Case Study #2
Roles & Responsibilities
WHO – Medical
Policies and
Procedures
Rotary – Funds,
Advocacy,
Volunteers
CDC – Scientific
and Technical
Expertise
UNICEF –
Vaccine
Distribution
Gates
Foundation –
Technical and
Financial
GAVI - Finance
Mechanism
41

42. Case Study #2
Timeline
Rotary and
Gates
Foundation =
28% of ALL
Global Polio
Funding
Type 2 Polio
= Eradicated
Type 3 Polio
= Eradicated
Type 1 Polio
= 95%
Eradicated
Today
Gates
Foundation
Matches 3:1
Rotary
Initiative =
$1.9 BILLION
2019
Gates
Foundation
Contributes
$150
Million/Year;
GAVI Joins
Imperial
College
London
Contracted
for Research
2000
UNICEF,
WHO, CDC
Join
Campaign
“March of
Dimes”
1988
Rotary
Launches
Global
Campaign to
Eradicate
Polio
1985
42

43. Case Study #2
Funders Challenges
Gates Foundation Impact report (2012):
• Criticism – Polio eradication detracts from strengthening overall health systems
• Decision to let the virus persist in war-torn areas
• Inconsistent quality of immunization efforts in high-risk pop (i.e. migrants)
• Other technical issues i.e. – Transmission rates, asymptomatic infections, virus
mutations in certain pop
• The Strategic Plan includes activities to strengthen routine immunization systems,
but more extensive plans and funding are needed to improve routine
immunizations.
• WHO Staffing rules – 25% required to spend doing immunization pulling them away
from other Polio activities
• Funding gaps & delays – “Every time corners are cut due to funding, there is a risk of
re-infection.”
43

44. Case Study #2
Implementation Challenges
2018 – GPEI report:
• 2016 – The vaccine changed from one type to the other.
• Production timing and length of clinical trials delaying deployment
• 155 countries at the same time to avoid continent jumping
• Gates Foundation + Imperial College London & WHO conducted the study
• The challenge: “…the number and magnitude of some of these outbreaks in different
geographies has proven more difficult to control than expected… Horn of Africa, DR Congo,
Nigeria”
• Working together in war-torn countries to deliver vaccine.
• Working with gov’t agencies to develop and implement vaccination campaigns.
• Balancing the risk tolerance of the partners with the solution options for deploying
more vaccine.
• The polio eradication program has been struggling with complacency, fatigue,
resistance, and poor planning—all human issues that technology can’t fix.
44

45. Overall Learnings
What are the key take-aways around collaborative funding models?
45

46. Major Take-away’s
1. Listen & Acknowledge – About trust and different perspectives
2. Collective experience – All players bring different skillsets in
addition to resources = Imperative that disparate skills are
identified
3. Data & Evidence driven decision making
4. Not just one type of funder – Gov’t, Public, Private & Corp make
the pool of resources broader and diverse
5. End user feedback – Not just about funding orgs, but about co-
creating and supporting the solution design and implementation
46

47. Resources
Various Case Studies
• https://ecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.go
ogle.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1017&context=curl_pubs
• https://ssir.org/articles/entry/a_new_model_of_collaborative_philanthr
opy
• https://www.unitedphilforum.org/resources/co-creation-viewing-
partnerships-through-new-lens
• https://mcconnellfoundation.ca/wp-
content/uploads/2017/07/Accelerating-Our-Impact-EN.pdf
• https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/charities-
giving/charities/policies-guidance/using-intermediary-carry-a-charitys-
activities-within-canada.html?=eml20110621
47

48. Philanthropy 3.0
Driven by Values,
Not Valuables
Impact
First
Time, Talent,
Treasure
and Ties
Crafting their
Philanthropic
Identities
How to reach us
grotstein@karmaandcents.com
rouellette@karmaandcents.com
48